[Green Knight]

Doesn't blasphemy imply that when a person does it it's purposeful? Just looked up the definition and it says "contemptuous or irreverent speech about God". I don't think these historians are being contemptuous about God when they say what they say. Some of them undoubtedly are, I have no doubt. Plenty out there who'd like to somehow DISPROVE the Bible. But others are just trying to get the facts as clearly as possible. How does that make them blasphemers?

Seems there really IS no point in arguing this with you, though. If you want to make a mountain out of a molehill and keep labelling historians as blasphemers, be my guest. Who am I to stand in the way of a perfectly good auto-da-fe'?

- Green Knight, playing to the lurkers, as always

[CCWoody]

Who am I to stand in the way of a perfectly good auto-da-fe'? ~ Green Kinght

I'm not part of the Inquisition. But, I am still amused about your mind numbed prattle to the lurkers.

CCWoody: Blasphemy is blasphemy.
Green Knight: You forgot about the occupational excemption.
CCWoody: Wonderfully intelligent argument.

Doesn't blasphemy imply that when a person does it it's purposeful? Just looked up the definition and it says "contemptuous or irreverent speech about God". I don't think these historians are being contemptuous about God when they say what they say. ~ Green Knight

Well, gosh, even granting your silly assertion about purpose, are you now going to argue that when a historian says "Jesus did not die for anybody's sins" he really didn't purpose to say exactly what he said?

historian: Well, God, you see, this is how it is: I really didn't intend to blasphemy You when I said that Your Son didn't die for anybody's sins and You didn't raise Him from the dead so can I have that get into Heaven card now?

Woody.

P.S. The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.