Is Holding to A Cessationist Position on Spiritual Gifts Committing an Unpardonable Sin Against the Holy Spirit?

Is Holding to A Cessationist Position on Spiritual Gifts Committing an Unpardonable Sin Against the Holy Spirit?

What is that?  An unpardonable sin?  Where?  First lets show the biblical text under question and then lets deal the context of when it occurred and what if any relevance there is for believers today.  Obviously, if there is a possibility to commit sin (without forgiveness) after the cross then it is truly a predicament.  Could this apply to believers as well as unbelievers?    

So whats the text under discussion, 

"20 And the multitude cometh together again, so that they could not so much as eat bread. 21 And when his friends heard of it, they went out to lay hold on him: for they said, He is beside himself. 22 And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils. 23 And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan? 
24 And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 
25 And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand. 
26 And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end. 
27 No man can enter into a strong man’s house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his house. 
28 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: 29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation: 30 Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit." (Mark 3:20-30; Context is also repeated in Mt 12 and Lk 11)

The last verse is the text under discussion.  The entire paragraph is listed to show the local context in which it appears.  Having the context for proof texts goes a long way for weeding out verses which are commonly quoted out of their context to prove some theological or practical position.  So my concern is what it means to "blaspheme against the Holy Ghost."  What did it mean when Jesus said it in the first century?  What application and authority does it carry for us today?  More importantly, would it be correct for a Charismatic to use this text to defend their views or to say speaking against their views is not allowed (or worse making it a sin)?  Here's another ongoing thought: what accusation do some people repeatedly make concerning modern English Bible translations--as to their source)?  A little double-edged sword here?

First, Jesus has just healed individuals (Mk 3:10), more importantly the chapter began with Jesus healing on the sabbath day (vv. 2, 4).  After this the context shifts to Jesus ordaining twelve (vv. 14-21).  From here religious leaders begin to make accusations against Jesus  (v. 22).  Verses 23-29 record Jesus' response to their accusation (this is conveniently marked by some publishers with a red font lettering).  Again, by way of reminder, the red font is no more inspired, preserved, nor authoritative than the black font. 

Second, Jesus' (vv. 23-29) begins with a question and a series of conditional statements related to division (see my formatting above "and if").  Jesus shows how ridiculous their views are.  He was defeating Satan, not serving him.  He was directly attacked for performing a miracle (healing people that were sick, vv. 3, 10).  To put it simply, these unbelieving Jewish leaders were saying Jesus was performing legitimate sign-miracles in the power of Satan ("by" marks the means of this miracle, v. 22).    

Lets follow this up with the notes found in major study Bibles for comparison.  I've tried to highlight some of the repeating themes the study Bible notes are catching on (or at least repeating).

"Whenever someone deliberately and disrespectfully slanders the person and ministry of the Holy Spirit in pointing to the Lordship and redemption of Jesus Christ, he completely negates and forfeits any possibility of present or future forgiveness of sins, because he has wholly rejected the only basis of God’s salvation." (The MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1465).

"The unforgiveable sin is knowingly and boldly attributing the Spirit's works to demonic forces (v. 22); people who do this reject the Spirit's testimony to Christ and thus will never seek the Savior for forgiveness." (The Reformation Heritage KJV Study Bible, p. 1419).

"However, if a person persistently attributes to Satan what is accomplished by the power of God—that is, if one makes a flagrant, willful, decisive judgment that the Spirit’s testimony about Jesus is satanic—then such a person never has forgiveness." (The ESV Study Bible, p. 1899).

"The unforgivable blasphemy specified here is the act of deliberately associating the power and the work of Jesus, who is full of the Holy Spirit, with the work of Satan. This is to equate supreme spiritual good with supreme spiritual evil, hardening one’s heart in a way that makes repentance, and therefore forgiveness, impossible." (The Reformation Study Bible, p. 1420).

"Jesus here teaches that it also may be the reviling of God by attributing the Spirit’s work to Satan. The special circumstances involved in this blasphemy cannot be duplicated today; therefore, this sin cannot now be committed. Jesus exhorted the Pharisees to turn and be justified (vv. 33, 37)." (Ryrie Study Bible, p. 1534).

Notice how each of the study Bible notes are repeating the theme of attributing the power of the third member of the Godhead (the Holy Spirit) to Satan.  The interesting point to note is that only one of the note sets actually includes a reference to the actual context in which this miracle occurred (Ryrie).  The sign-miracle was the healing of sick people.  Not speaking in tongues, interpreting, or prophecy.  I am rather perplexed why they left the scenario open and not specific to the situation.  Perhaps because of the broader theme of the forgiveness of sins which Jesus does address on multiple other occasions.  

In conclusion, I would suggest that genuine believers cannot commit this sin today.  Simply line this up with a thorough understanding of perseverance and assurance in relation to salvation.  Second, this was a sign gift, as a Cessationist, I do not believe the scriptures teach sign gifts such as: prophecy, tongues, revelation are in practice today as they are practiced in the Gospels and book of Acts. Third, these Jews were not born-again believers, so this sin was obviously not committed by a genuine believer.  Lastly, based on the context, I would suggest that any parallel made with the charismatic movement is illegitimate.  I am more concerned with the ad hominem claims in the translation realm in relation to translations (conveniently after 1611) have Satanic sources.  This is a troubling accusation. I close with a quote from a journal article on this specific issue, 

"It is clear from the accounts in Matthew 12 and Mark 3 that Jesus’ charge of blasphemy was directed toward the unbelieving Pharisees. If the sin could be committed by believers, it would be an exception to the doctrine of the eternal security of the believer (John 5:24; 6:37; 10:27–30; etc.). Truly, only the unregenerate can commit the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit." (DBTS Journal 2009, :B. Combs, "The Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit.")

Enjoy.  Comments as always encouraged.
I would especially encourage you to read the above article online.  Especially if this text troubles you.  It is free at www.dbts.edu.