Quote
Link said:
In response to Covenant in Blood

Quote
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.

No, I said the Spirit "is not at work in the modern-day Pentecostal/Charismatic prophecy/tongues/etc."—i.e., their so-called spiritual gifts. Learn to read!

Quote
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.

What is it with you and the word "whosoever"? Have I said that one must be a Pharisee to blaspheme the Spirit? No! What I've said is that to be guilty of BLASPHEMY involves a certain level of knowledge—which the Pharisees had. And I most certainly have not said that one can commit such blasphemy and not be guilty of it!

You'd best watch yourself quite closely now! You're putting a plethora of words in my mouth, and that will get you banned from this discussion board very quickly if you keep it up!

Quote
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.

Yes, we do, by the implication of Christ's own words to them, as I have explained.

Quote
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.

Where on earth are you getting all this stuff? Why not deal with what I have said, since it is after all to me that you are responding?

Quote
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.

Bringing up the unpardonable sin to cessationists is a standard tactic from Pentecostals/Charismatics. STANDARD. I dare say any of us here who have been involved in discussion with P/C's regarding whether the sign gifts continue today have heard the same accusation! So it was little surprise to me that you went ahead and brought it up. How ironic that you should say that I am reckless about my claims with the Holy Spirit, when rather it is you who have played fast and loose with my words! When I say that the Spirit is not at work among the modern-day "gifts," it is entirely consistent with what I believe to be the biblical doctrine concerning their cessation.

But you have virtually accused me and any other cessationists of being guilty of the unpardonable sin if we say that the modern-day "gifts" are not genuine works of the Holy Spirit! (Since that is "speaking a word against the Spirit" in your understanding, is it not?) Is this consistent with what you've said to me? Tell me, are you so arrogant as to think that you know that the Holy Spirit is not at work among cessationists?

Quote
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.

I Cor. 13 doesn't even mention the idea? Are you blind? Read v. 8! You can argue all you want that this doesn't mean that the gifts HAVE passed away, but you cannot argue that it says nothing about the idea that they WILL. And you accuse cessationists of not basing their claims on Scripture! What a crock!

Quote
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.

Yes, it is a "trump card"—a way of silencing any and all opponents by backhandedly accusing them of the only sin which is said in Scripture to be unforgiveable. This as opposed to actually presenting any formal refutation of the cessationist postion: instead, the well is first poisoned so that the cessationist position is in opposition to the Spirit from the get-go, rather than after the thoughtful consideration of the whole counsel of Scripture.

Quote
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?

I've already told you, Christ's word about blasphemy of the Spirit was not a warning to believers, but a condemnation of those who had already committed the sin. It is ludicrous to suggest that one who is INDWELLED by the Spirit could blaspheme the same Spirit! Do you believe the Spirit does not guard God's children against such? Obedience to the Spirit is not a work that originates within us, but it is rather a work of the Spirit Himself: "For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ" (Phil. 1:6), "for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13).

Another post like this from you and I myself will ban you.

Good day.


Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.