Parallel passage: Luke 11:23, omitted in Mark. The aim of this verse is doubtful.
Parallel passages: Mark 3:28-30 and Luke 12:10 (where the context is not the same, he having passed straight from our Luke 12:30 to our Luke 12:43, vide infra). It is to be observed that all three accounts differ a good deal in form, though but slightly in substance.
The Apostolical Constitutions contain what is probably a mixture of these verses with 2 Peter 2:1 and other passages of the New Testament. Resch, in accordance with his theory, thinks that the Constitutions have preserved a genuine utterance of the Lord, of which only different fragments are presented in various parts of the New Testament.
A few words of introduction to these difficult verses. It has been strangely forgotten, in their interpretation, that our Lord spoke in language that he intended his hearers to understand, and that probably not a single one of those who stood by would understand by the expressions,,, the Spirit" (verse 31), "the Holy Spirit" (verse 32), a Person in the Godhead distinct from the First Person or the Second (cf. Matthew 1:18, note). At most they would understand them to refer to an influence by God upon men (Psalms 51:11; cf. Luke 11:13), such as Christ had claimed to possess in a special degree (Luke 4:18). In inquiring, therefore, for an explanation of our Lord's sayings, we must not begin at the Trinitarian standpoint, and see in the words a contrast between "blasphemy" against one Person of the Trinity, and "blasphemy" against another. The contrast is between "blasphemy" against Christ as Son of man, Christ in his earthly work and under earthly conditions, the Christ whom they saw and whom they did not understand, and "blasphemy" against God as such working upon earth. "Blasphemy" against the former might be due to ignorance and prejudice, but "blasphemy" against the latter was to speak against God's work recognized as such, against God manifesting himself to their consciences (cf. verses 27, 28); it was to reject the counsel of God towards them, to set themselves up in opposition to God, and thus to exclude from themselves forgiveness. Just as under the Law there were sacrifices for sins of ignorance and minor offences, but none for wilful disregard of and opposition to God, so must it be at all times even under the gospel itself.
Observe that the "blasphemy" is understood by our Lord as showing the state of the heart (cf. Acts 7:51). What the effect of a change of heart, i.e. of repentance, would be does not enter into our Lord's utterance. All other sin is venial, but for heart-opposition there is no forgiveness. As Tyndale says, "Sin against the Holy Ghost is despising of the gospel and his working. Where that bideth is no remedy of sin: for it fighteth against faith, which is the forgiveness of sin. If that be put away, faith may enter in, and all sins depart." (Cf. also Dorner, ' System,' 3.73; 4.91.)