How far do you have to go before what you are doing is considered blasphemy?  What do you consider blasphemy?  Do other religions besides Christianity have a concept of blasphemy, and is it the same concept?
131994
Unforgivable Sin -\n\nI believe that to deny the Godhead (1 Jn.5:7 below) is blasphemy again the Holy Ghost and is the unforgivable sin (Matt.12:31-32, Mk.3:29, Eph.4:30 below).\n\nThe only begotten son of God the Father (Jn.1:14 below), Jesus (the Word - Jn.1:1, Jn.1:14 below), His beloved Son (Matt.3:17 below), was conceived of the Holy Ghost (Matt.1:20 below). \n\nIn Jesus dwells ALL the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Col.2:9 below).  \n\noGod the Father\noThe Holy Spirit of God the Father and\noThe Word of God the Father\n\nIt is God the Father who conceived in Mary His very Word through His very Holy Spirit (Matt.1:20 below).\n\n1 Jn.5:7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and THESE THREE ARE ONE.\n\nCol.2:9  For in him dwelleth ALL the fulness of the Godhead bodily.\n\nJn.1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, (Matt.1:20, Matt.3:17 below)) full of grace and truth.\n\nJn.1:1  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God (Re.1:6 below).\n\nRe.1:6And hath made us kings and priests unto God AND his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.  (Jn.1:1 above)\n\nMatt.3:17  And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son (Matt.1:20 below), in whom I am well pleased.\n\nMatt.1:20  But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost (Jn.1:14, Matt.3:17 above).\n\nMatt.12:31 Wherefore I say unto you, all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy [against] the [Holy] Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.\n\nMatt.12:32And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, IT SHALL NOT BE FORGIVEN HIM, neither in this world, neither in the [world] to come (Mk.3:29 below).\n\nMk.3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath NEVER forgiveness (Matt.12:31 above), but is in danger of eternal damnation:\n\nEph.4:30And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.\n\n\n\nPat (ndbpsa ©)
113464
Muslims: too many extremists without boundaries, too few mainstream moderates to condemn the extremists.  Killing in the name of religion?  you are a bonehead moonlight, what you are talking about is demanding that no one criticize or poke fun at one of your icons unless they want to be killed.  That is outrageous!
167257
I have mixed feelings on the subject. Personally I think it’s a concept that has an impressive historical record that I acknowledge as one of many possibilities. In the end you’re going to need to die to really know for sure. Also contrary to what many people here are telling you, Roman Catholics aren't the only Christians to hold on to the concept of purgatory as a teaching. \n\n\n\nFor those of you who don't know, Purgatory is essentially defined as: "a place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God's grace are not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions."\n\nReferences to a place of purgation (place where your purged of your sins) are made as far back as the beginning of the third century (by Clement of Alexandria) and are frequently referenced up to and beyond the bible's canonization (where they decided what books should go into the bible) in 390CE. While no direct references to purgatory were chosen in 390CE, it was acknowledged that the concept was worthy of incorporation into other church publications.\n\nWhen the Reformation came in northern europe, the concept of purgatory was something chosen to be dropped to help distinguish the reformers from the old Church. At the time the idea was being abused in some regions to encourage wealthy church patrons to help "buy" their way out of their sins. This is why many of the Protestant groups today are still contemptuous of the concept, despite it's importance to earlier Christian groups. \n\nThe second act of Dante’s Inferno deals with the concept of purgatory, but if you really wish to learn more you’ll need to read translations of the works of St. Augustine and other early Christian leaders. Dan 12:10; Zech 13:9; Mal 3:2-3; 2 Mac 12:42-45; Matthew 5:26; Lk 12:47-48; Lk 12:58-59; 1 Cor 3:13-15; Apoc 21:27: are some of the biblical passages which were included in 390 that many site provide for the existence of a state of purgatory.\n\n\nArmus
561115
I agree, people worship Jesus and Pastors/Ministers/Bishops/Popes/. Per God's word in the "original" Bible false Idols are Blasphemous. That has never sat well with me. As the "original" Bible stated "God is within you". Making everyone God. Meaning you have the power. I am not religious, religion is such a crock! I have studied many religions and all seem to have been basically enacted to stop humans from animalistic behavior by scaring them. All religion was created for was to keep order, stating that if you acted un-Godly you would end up in an Eternal Hell. The only problem with this is that nature still exists. In nature animals kill, rape, are homosexual, and live un-Godly. Yet most say all of God's creaturs end up in Heaven. HUH? Just live by the Golden Rule (do unto others as you would have them do unto you). Not for God's sake, but it really does make life easier. If you yell at someone they will yell back, if you reason with someone they will reason with you.
97192
Blasphemy is the defamation of the name of God. These may include using sacred names as stress expletives without intention to pray or speak of sacred matters. Sometimes blasphemy is used loosely to mean any profane language, for example Holy Shit, Fucking Hell, Jesus Christ!, God!, etc
514255
Hi Gorgeous,\n\nYou just did a straw man argument.  Hell is a Christian theological concept.  In fact, it is generally a new testament concept.  It is impossible to discuss it without referring to how it came to be defined.  I’ll do my best to minimize any references and use reason and common sense. \n\nA common religious and cultural concept is “punishment” for bad people.  I think it is a just concept.  Buddha say, if you are bad, you will have bad karma in your next life.  Bad Karma is hell.   The Greek Gods had Hades, in the underworld.  \n\nOr, Jesus says, Good = love God (faith) and love others as yourself (action).   “ON THESE 2 COMMANDMENTS HANG ALL THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS”.  (Read Matt 22:34-40).   So Ted says, if you read something that contradicts this, then check your premises, you will find one is wrong.  Everything in the bible has to (it must) logically align with this statement.  So, what is the interpretation basis to align with this one statement?  That’s a longer answer, and not part of your question.  \n\nHowever, what is the GOOD that will be the basis of judgment?  Most people say, “got to have faith”.  What is faith?  They then start prescribing rules and beliefs.  Now can you prove that these rules and beliefs 100% align with loving God?  Not usually.  There are many main religions, and then 100’s of sects.  Carl Jung says, “The shoe that fits one person, pinches another.”  So I also am skeptical.    \n\nNow do not forget this one dynamic of human nature that exists.  A religion (versus personal belief in God), as any and all organizations, always tries to grow and sustain itself.  It is pure human nature, in fact, it is good, for without it there would not be progress.  As for all human organizations, belief is based on some dogma or “Vision Statement”, loyalty to the organization, and growth thru product sales (corporations) or people or faith (religion).  In a sense, it is survival of the fittest.  The religion with the best message and the one that meets the most human needs, or aligns with an inspiring spiritual message the best, wins.   So they are all competing and believe they are right.   But they do say a lot of different things.  From the outside, this does not sound spiritual.   From the inside, it can be very spiritual.   Religion and church is a choice, and can be a very satisfying choice, if it meets your needs.  \n\nBack to what Jesus, is said to have said, [paraphrased]:  to be good, to pass His judgement, “feed the hungry, give water to the thirsty, shelter the stranger in need, clothe those who need it, help the sick, and visit those in prison.”  (Matt 25:35-36).  How else can it be known that you have loved others as you love yourself?  It is your actions.  Think about it, there is not one single word on belief, just actions.  This aligns with love others as yourself.  This is a good statement.     \n\nDo not forget, that in a solely materialist universe, which is cause and effect only, this leads to nihilism on a grand scale.  That is why philosophy and politics and much more is so nihilistic today.  If we are random quirks of nature, then in the grand scheme of nature, neither purpose, nor the sanctity of life can be justified.  This has and will have increasingly terrible implications to civilization.  Inherently, most people are not nihilistic, they are good people, with or without religion.  But if you are brilliant person without a conscience, heaven help us. \n\nRead the parable of the talents (Matt 25:14-30).  If you do not work to reach your human potential, and thus contribute your potential to mankind, then “cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness”.   This seems to align with loving others as yourself, and proving it by action, and being judged specifically on this aspect of your life.   What is the outer darkness?  It is not explained.  \n\nTo me it seems that religions try to make having faith the critical issue, in their
641659
Blaspheme of the Holy Ghost is not an easy sin to accomplish. One must know the thruth of the Holy Spirit and choose to blaspheme or deny the power of the Holy Spirit. All other sin is forgivable. But this is personal to God. In my life I cannot imagine any situation that would lead me to commit such a sin. It is not easy to do and requires a conscious decision to do so.\n\n\nI have known those who have commited this sin. These few were Spirit filled believers at one time and this happened only after years of God dealing with them and reaching out to them and their refusal to change. God is not a hard-fisted stern old man sitting on the throne just waiting for someone to make a mistake. He is perfect compassion and unending patience. He is forgiveness beyond measure and unconditional love beyond understanding. He is life and hope. But even He has one limit that we dare not cross. Every loving father must say no at some point.
223388
I am a Christian but heard other Christians call non-Christians similar things, including calling them heathens.  It's wrong for Christians to judge.  That's totally up to God.  We should never, ever tell someone they are going to hell.
512917
Fair enough, now are you going to post all the acts of evil perpetrated in the name of Christianity.  See 34 AD to Present.\n\nNote: Big Pen, the answer was meant to be sarcastic, however, Christianity still has much to answer for.
368393
I'm an atheist, first of all.\nI have a couple of problems with your question:\n-By what standard does the punishment fit or not fit a crime? How can you sum up the cost of adultery, homosexuality, and other sins, since their cost(loss) to society differs based on the culture.\n-You cannot compare stoning with a "possibly future punishment" of lasting torment.
590545
This idiotic concept of Blasphemy is only in abrahmic religions.\n\nNone of the eastern religions have this stupidity\n\nIs god so small that he can be maligned by humans\n\nwhat a childish philosophy and what a narrow minded religion....\n\nthanks god i am not the one from your religion
419155
Atheist here, and yes, I have indeed tried to see the other side of the arguement.\n\nI was raised Lutheran from infancy, so I've got 20+ years of Christian teachings under my belt. Went to church services and Sunday School weekly. With my family not going was NOT an option. I also own a Bible as a result of Sunday School attendance. New Revised Standard Version(NRSV), not a King James or any other version, but it's a Bible nonetheless. And yes, I have read it. The most recent time was this summer.\n\nSo there's no way that I'm unqualified to speak on religious matters as far as Christianity's concerned.\n\nWhen I answer questions on here or the rare times I'm able to speak with someone personally about religion and not end up in a fight over it, I try to see their side of the arguement, provided they haven't jumped right into insults and "You're wrong" and "You're going to burn in Hell" sort of crap right off the bat. Unfortunately, a lot of people where I live do just that, so you can see why it's rare I'm able to speak civilly with people in my hometown about religion.\n\nWhen it comes to insults and bigotry, I don't even bother. I walk away from people who talk like that to me in person and on YA, if I see questions I feel are biased or worse, I don't even bother to answer them. If a person's honest and polite, I'm all too happy to answer. If a person's just being an obnoxious jerk, I don't even waste my bandwidth.\n\nWith polite people, I do try to see their side of the arguement, especially when I do already understand Christianity. When it comes to other religions I'm not as familiar with, even though I might not fully understand them, I try to, and I do defend other religions as I know that religion itself isn't a bad thing. No truly bad religions, just bad followers.\n\nYes, I have even defended Christianity more than once. I defended it just a few minutes ago with the question I answered just before this one about the whole church and state and prayer in school issue. A lot of Christians think they don't have the right to pray in a public school, but I've looked into that myself for the last ten years.\n\nJust because it was decided in 1963 that it wasn't right and constitutional to require kids to recite a prayer(from my mother, it sounds like it was usually the Lord's Prayer, at least when she was young. Seeing as how the ruling was made long before I was born, I can't say if that was standard or just what my mother's school did), doesn't mean Christianity is "banned". Christian kids can freely pray or read the Bible or hold Bible clubs(if they allow things like photography clubs, they can allow Bible and other religious clubs as well) or invite another classmate to join them for services.\n\nI might be an atheist and I might not want my own children to have to recite the Lord's Prayer or any prayer in school, doesn't mean I won't stand up for the rights of Christians and anyone else who's religious to have their beliefs at school, or when holding office, or whatever. Just because you step into a public place, doesn't mean you have to leave your beliefs at home. All it means is that you have to be aware and respectful of others and that goes for everyone.\n\nI was raised Christian and had my own beliefs(and eventually nonbelief as I was sort of paganistic for a time before I turned to atheism) stepped on and treated as if I was undeserving before. My own family has unfortunately taken to this sort of behavior from time to time. It's happened to me way too many times, so I'm not about to do it to anyone else.\n\nI have gone to church, I've read the Bible, I've studied church and state matters and tried to learn about and understand other religions for some time. I've had painful personal experiences when it comes to my beliefs being stepped on.
270326
this is a difficult passage, i too am having problems with it\ni think it is referencing the only unforgivable sin, blasphemy...because you know of the truth but you blatantly disregard it. You ignorantly ignore the truth of the word and therefore cannot be accepted. But I could be wrong altogether
664003
When you say someone is sinning or not following your gods way , are you not judging them ? And if so are you not (by your own religious laws) then condemned ? \nIf no one is being harm let them be and treat them as you wish yourself treated... that's your right as a human being regardless of whatever religion you subscribe to.
631084
First of all, let me tell you this....A sincere, faithful Christian who practices what God/Jesus really teaches in the Bible, would not belittle you or judge you.  The Bible tells us to first remove the "sin" from ourselves before we go pointing fingers and judging others.  ALL of us are sinners, NONE of us have the right to belittle, humiliate, harrass or put down anyone else.  The way to spread God's love and word is not through hard pressure but, rather, gentle discussion, an offering of sharing and prayer.  Although I don't feel it would be right to report them, I would nicely ask them to stop and to go back and read their Bibles about how it tells us to be Christ's disciples.  God bless you and I pray you will find your faith in your own journey in your time and in your way!  And, by the way, even Jesus has a sense of humor...he has to!  Just because we are Christians doesn't mean we have to be prudes or "serious" all the time.  I can laugh it up with the best of them and Jesus is #1 in my life!
479440
I agree with you, also, why do they blaspheme\n\nWhat is blasphemy? The bible attributes 2 definitions: \n1.John 10:33 “…but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.” – Claim to be God or His representative.\n2.Mark 2:7 “Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?” – Granting absolution (the power to forgive sin)\nNow, let’s look at some factual historical quotes:\n“We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty” – Pope Leo XIII, in an Encyclical letter, dated June 20, 1894.\n“It seems that Pope John Paul II now presides over the universal Church from his place upon Christ’s cross.” – Auckland, New Zealand, Sept 20, 2004, Zenit.org. \n“The judicial authority will even include the power to forgive sin.” The catholic encyclopedia Vol.12, Article “Pope”, p265.\n\nIs it clear from the above quotes that Catholics are blaspheming against God?  No wonder the beast of Revelations has the “name of blasphemy” and speaks “blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name”; this is because the beast claims powers that are the sole prerogative of God.
561669
That is the most blasphemous question you could ask. Regardless of your religious preference I believe you need to respect the choices of others who might take this question to offence. I'll pray for you.....you need prayers....