davidgeminden
Member
Is there a difference between judging a person and blaspheming a person?
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You are correct. The OP makes an assumption that is not possible.I'm confused. I thought one could only blaspheme the Lord?
Perhaps I don't know what you mean by 'blaspheme a person'?
You are correct. The OP makes an assumption that is not possible.
Blasphemy is always directed toward God. It is an insult to God.
"the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/blasphemy
I guess it depends on if you cussed while you were judging them.
Is there a difference between judging a person and blaspheming a person?
A dictionary defines words.A dictionary definition is not Scripture. Blasphemy is not just insulting God, it is attributing His work, especially that of the Holy Spirit, to another entity, usually an evil entity, or attributing God's work to Satan.
That is the sin of murder correctly defined by Jesus in Matthew 5. It is not blasphemy.While it may be impossible to use blasphemy against a person, one can hold such contempt in their heart for another that the sin of murder has been committed in one's heart.
Do you believe the assumption Mary and her immaculate assumption as well? Just because the RCC says so does not make it so! I trust the dictionary more than the RCC.Although blasphemy cannot be committed against a human, the RCC actually had a law in several countries called "blasphemy against the state" and the penalty could be death.
Then why are you relying on the RCC to define blasphemy for you?Not defining blasphemy properly has caused much grief and pain, again, spread mostly by the RCC. Here is a quote from Craig Bluemel on blasphemy. In part he says "Roman Catholicism has done severe damage to the minds and hearts of the human race, causing unwarranted fear, oppression, and untold misery because if its misapplication of the concept of blasphemy. Throughout the dark ages, Roman Catholic popes, prelates, bishops, and archbishops tried, convicted and then, by means of painful torture murdered those in opposition of the Romish church. Men such as John Huss adhered to the scriptures as authoritative in spiritual matters, and were put on trial, falsely convicted of heresy and accused of blasphemy, then condemned to die.
Does that make it right?The Christian churches are not far behind the Catholics in this regard, dangling this ‘deadly sin’ over the heads of its parishioners to keep them in line and conformity to the belief system established since the time of the early reformers. Blasphemy was even incorporated into early common law, and certain crimes were punishable as blasphemy against the state."
First, if one has cursed God, he has blasphemed God. So you are wrong on that account. Blasphemy, by its very definition is insulting God.Blasphemy is not cursing God or any of the three Persons of the Trinity. It is a conscience effort to destroy the work of the Lord and attribute it to another person, ie and evil entity.
Then why do it?Misuse of the word has caused lots of problems in history. There is no need to continue the practice.
A dictionary defines words.
That is the sin of murder correctly defined by Jesus in Matthew 5. It is not blasphemy.
Do you believe the assumption Mary and her immaculate assumption as well? Just because the RCC says so does not make it so! I trust the dictionary more than the RCC.
Then why are you relying on the RCC to define blasphemy for you?
Do they also define theotokos for you? Do you believe all their doctrines?
Why not just join them?
We use dictionaries for a reason.
Does that make it right?
First, if one has cursed God, he has blasphemed God. So you are wrong on that account. Blasphemy, by its very definition is insulting God.
Second, if you insult God in any way, you are attacking the work of God, are you not?
Third, When Jesus was accused of blasphemy in John 10:30ff the Jews were correct in their assessment: "...because thou art a man and makest thyself God." That is blasphemy, well defined by the Jews. The place where they were wrong is that they were unwilling to admit that Christ was the Messiah--God. Your definition doesn't hold up.
Then why do it?
Perhaps you are posting in the wrong thread. This thread is about judging and "blasphemy." It is NOT about "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit," a sin which is impossible to commit today. Thus your confusion. Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is an unforgivable sin; but it cannot be committed today. The Pharisees were attributing the miracles that Jesus performed (and they witnessed in the flesh) to the power of Satan rather than the power of the Spirit of God. But Jesus is not in the flesh standing in front of you or anyone else performing miracles today. Thus it is impossible to commit that sin.You tell me since you are the one that misdefined it. Blasphemy is an unforgivable sin that goes way beyond the use of God's Name in slang terms.
This thread is NOT on blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Start another thread if you wish, but don't derail this one. That is not the topic here.So, according to your definition, anyone who has ever cursed God has committed blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, which means there is no forgiveness for them. The Holy Spirit is God. You seem obsessed with the RCC. I have left the Presbyterian Church behind decades ago.
My definition is not in error. Yours is.You asked why I was using the RCC definition. You totally missed the point. I was trying to point out that both your and their definition is in error.
Perhaps you are posting in the wrong thread. This thread is about judging and "blasphemy." It is NOT about "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit," a sin which is impossible to commit today. Thus your confusion. Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is an unforgivable sin; but it cannot be committed today. The Pharisees were attributing the miracles that Jesus performed (and they witnessed in the flesh) to the power of Satan rather than the power of the Spirit of God. But Jesus is not in the flesh standing in front of you or anyone else performing miracles today. Thus it is impossible to commit that sin.
This thread is NOT on blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Start another thread if you wish, but don't derail this one. That is not the topic here.
Blasphemy is speaking irreverently of God; insulting God; or making remarks about God that are not true (hence insulting).
My definition is not in error. Yours is.
He has this much correct. It cannot be committed today.I cannot believe this post. First of all, it is quite possible to commit blasphemy against the Holy Spirit today. From Blue Letter Commentary:
How Does Someone Today Blaspheme the Holy Spirit?
When Christ was on earth the Holy Spirit was blasphemed when His works were attributed to the devil. How does one blaspheme the Holy Spirit today?
We must first understand that His situation was unique. Christ was physically present, performing miracles through the Holy Spirits power to testify that He was the Messiah. But He is not with us today in a physical presence. How then does blasphemy of the Holy Spirit occur?
They are different because the one cannot be committed today. It is a moot point.If the two subjects are technically different, they are very similar. Why do you bring up accusations of derailing a thread? I am not going to be lead into another infraction.
You are correct. The OP makes an assumption that is not possible.
Blasphemy is always directed toward God. It is an insult to God.
"the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/blasphemy
The title of the thread:The original post in this thread asked "Is there a difference between judging a person and blaspheming a person?" Now, compare that with your quote above. How is that not derailing a thread? No where did the question ask about God.
Is there a difference between judging a person and blaspheming a person?
The title of the thread:
[/B]I answered in order to correct the OP. Blasphemy, by very definition, is against God not against a man. I have pointed that out both by dictionary and by Scriptures.
John 10:30ff defines blasphemy: "you commit blasphemy because being a man you claim to be God."
That was the greatest insult a man could make--to claim to be God.
God is holy; man is unholy. What an insult to claim to be God. Totally irreverent!
The Jews knew what blasphemy was.
Stephen was stoned for blasphemy.
Christ went to the cross for blasphemy.
Read the Scriptures and learn what it is.
A dictionary definition is not Scripture. Blasphemy is not just insulting God, it is attributing His work, especially that of the Holy Spirit, to another entity, usually an evil entity, or attributing God's work to Satan.
While it may be impossible to use blasphemy against a person, one can hold such contempt in their heart for another that the sin of murder has been committed in one's heart.
Although blasphemy cannot be committed against a human, the RCC actually had a law in several countries called "blasphemy against the state" and the penalty could be death.
Not defining blasphemy properly has caused much grief and pain, again, spread mostly by the RCC. Here is a quote from Craig Bluemel on blasphemy. In part he says "Roman Catholicism has done severe damage to the minds and hearts of the human race, causing unwarranted fear, oppression, and untold misery because if its misapplication of the concept of blasphemy. Throughout the dark ages, Roman Catholic popes, prelates, bishops, and archbishops tried, convicted and then, by means of painful torture murdered those in opposition of the Romish church. Men such as John Huss adhered to the scriptures as authoritative in spiritual matters, and were put on trial, falsely convicted of heresy and accused of blasphemy, then condemned to die.
The Christian churches are not far behind the Catholics in this regard, dangling this ‘deadly sin’ over the heads of its parishioners to keep them in line and conformity to the belief system established since the time of the early reformers. Blasphemy was even incorporated into early common law, and certain crimes were punishable as blasphemy against the state."
Blasphemy is not cursing God or any of the three Persons of the Trinity. It is a conscience effort to destroy the work of the Lord and attribute it to another person, ie and evil entity.
Misuse of the word has caused lots of problems in history. There is no need to continue the practice.