₦airaland Forum

MaxInDHouse:
Blasphemy can't be justified again after the Jews scattered!
Blasphemy could only make sense if the God in question does something incredible, such a God can impose on the worshipers certain rules that mustn't be broken.
For instance the Israelites were slaves in the land of Egypt for centuries until the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob who called them "His people" singlehandedly went there to free them.
Logically such a deity has every right to impose His standard on this people now that they are His own property. But is there any as in ANY other god that has done something close to that?
So any religion pointing to what the God of Abraham did with the Israelites should provide reasons why their god should demand such from people. Jesus did not impose God's laws on his generation because he knew that such can't be justified anywhere. Therefore instead of imposing what God told Moses (who was one of those that witness the Exodus) Jesus told his own disciples never to impose his rules on anyone {Luke 9:52-56} because such can only be justified when the so called deity has proof of ownership over the people!

Lol

Maynman:
Religious countries have blaspheming laws, secular countries don’t, so what will secular countries consider as “blaspheming” before they legally deal with the person?

Let's start by naming some "secular countries".

Give me a few and let's consider if they have "blaspheming laws".

MaxInDHouse:
That's inhumane!

Everyone should be free to choose whatever they want whether to believe or disbelieve the stories written in any book.
Whoever finds it interesting can decide to pay attention to it and whoever feels it's trash should walk away. It's a free world!

Wow. Did someone hijack this account? LoLz. Kudos anyway, couldn't have said it better.

LordReed:
Wow. Did someone hijack this account? LoLz. Kudos anyway, couldn't have said it better.

Now you know the difference between a true Christian and a churchgoer!

budaatum:
Let's start by naming some "secular countries".

Give me a few and let's consider if they have "blaspheming laws".

USA and UK.

Wilgrea7:
The persecution of unbelievers is something that stems from the alleged instructions of certain Gods in the Bible/Quran.

The Abrahamic God is the one who allegedly made these laws

Wike's persecution of PDP people in his land stems from the Bible/Quran eh?

MaxInDHouse:
As long as they're not imposing their unbelief on others...

As sharia imposes their belief so does America impose their unbelief.

In the end, we see man doing whatever he likes and someone receiving his injustice in the power of legal.

Dtruthspeaker:
Wike's persecution of PDP people in his land stems from the Bible/Quran eh?

“Pdp people” are unbelievers?

Maynman:
“Pdp people” are unbelievers?

Would PDP reject unbelievers?

Dtruthspeaker:
Would PDP reject unbelievers?

Pdp is a political party.

Slowly read what he said.
“ The persecution of unbelievers is something that stems from the alleged instructions of certain Gods in the Bible/Quran.

The Abrahamic God is the one who allegedly made these laws”

Maynman:
Pdp is a political party...

And political parties are made up of people who can be believers or unbelievers or anti believers or mixed believers etc.

Dtruthspeaker:
And political parties are made up of people who can be believers or unbelievers or anti believers or mixed believers etc.

“The persecution of unbelievers is something that stems from the alleged instructions of certain Gods in the Bible/Quran.

The Abrahamic God is the one who allegedly made these laws“

budaatum:
This person's crime was not being an atheist, but being blasphemous!

It is not exactly wise to be blasphemous where religionists abound.

Blasphemy is subjective. Nonsense.

Dtruthspeaker:
As sharia imposes their belief so does America impose their unbelief.
In the end, we see man doing whatever he likes and someone receiving his injustice in the power of legal.

Nobody is imposing beliefs it's politics which is domination! Ecclesiastes 8:9

1Sharon:
Blasphemy is subjective. Nonsense.

It is "subjective nonsense" to you, and likely to me too, but that is hardly the point since the subjectivity of some is putting some in prison and even killing some.

Maynman:
USA and UK.

You will not accept these examples I will offer, I'm sure, considering they are not religious and there's no law per se, but if you stretch your imagination some, consider the reactions to the following that some consider very subjective blasphemies.

"A man has been detained by police after appearing to throw eggs at King Charles and Camilla, the Queen Consort, during a walkabout in York.

Several police officers were seen restraining the suspect on the ground behind temporary fencing set up at Micklegate Bar in the city for the king’s visit on Wednesday."
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/nov/09/man-detained-appearing-throw-eggs-king-charles-camilla

“This morning, after discussion with our filmmakers and distribution partners, we made the decision not to proceed with any distribution for our recently completed documentary about Kanye West,” CEOs Modi Wiczyk and Asif Satchu and COO Scott Tenley wrote in an open letter. “We cannot support any content that amplifies his platform.”
https://www.indiewire.com/2022/10/kanye-west-documentary-ye-canceled-1234775562/

budaatum:
You will not accept these examples I will offer, I'm sure, considering they are not religious and there's no law per se, but if you stretch your imagination some, consider the reactions to the following that some consider very subjective blasphemies.

Lol, I thought “blasphemy” had a definition lol.
Why stretch my imagination when i can deal with actual fact, that’s desperation.

Maynman:
Lol, I thought “blasphemy” had a definition lol.
Why stretch my imagination when i can deal with actual fact, that’s desperation.

Yes it does.
blasphemy - the action or offence of speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things; profane talk.

And as sharon rightfully pointed out, "Blasphemy is subjective". After all, one person's sacrilegiously and profane talk is another person's freedom of speech.

That said, I knew you wouldn't be able to "stretch your imagination". Regardless, blasphemy laws per se were only abolished in UK very recently,

Laws prohibiting blasphemy and blasphemous libel in the United Kingdom date back to the mediaeval times as common law and in some special cases as enacted legislation. The common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel were formally abolished in England and Wales in 2008 and Scotland in 2021. Equivalent laws remain in Northern Ireland.

What UK now has is the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, which pretty much can be used for the same purpose. Some will even insist that reactions to Islamophobia and anti-semitism are kind of blasphemy "laws", since they carry a penalty of sanction.

budaatum:
Yes it does.
blasphemy - the action or offence of speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things; profane talk.

And as sharon rightfully pointed out, "Blasphemy is subjective". After all, one person's sacrilegiously and profane talk is another person's freedom of speech.

That said, I knew you wouldn't be able to "stretch your imagination". Regardless, blasphemy laws per se were only abolished in UK very recently,



What UK now has is the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, which pretty much can be used for the same purpose. Some will even insist that reactions to Islamophobia and anti-semitism are kind of blasphemy "laws", since they carry a penalty of sanction.

I don’t deal on imagination, i deal on facts. I’m not desperate. I’m glad you know i won’t be able to “stretch my imagination".

Nothing in the racial and religious hatred Act got anything to do with “blasphemy” as you defined it, can you point out the section?

Maynman:
I don’t deal on imagination, i deal on facts. I’m not desperate.

Nothing in the racial and religious hatred Act got anything to do with “blasphemy” as you defined it, can you point out the section?

If you go on UK streets saying what some consider blasphemy, you will be arrested at least for public disorder. One just has to prove you've been hateful.

But since you "deal on facts", I guess you'd have to go try it and see for yourself. I suggest you try saying something blasphemous against Judaism at Stamford Hill. Lots of Jews live there who are bound to be offended.

budaatum:
If you go on UK streets saying what some consider blasphemy, you will be arrested at least for public disorder. One just has to prove you've been hateful.

But since you "deal on facts", I guess you'd have to go try it and see for yourself. I suggest you try saying something blasphemous against Judaism at Stamford Hill. Lots of Jews live there who are bound to be offended.

Keep stretching

hopefulLandlord:
"Theocracy is the worst of all governments. If we must have a tyrant, a robber baron is far better than an inquisitor. The baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity at some point be sated; and since he dimly knows he is doing wrong he may possibly repent.
But the inquisitor who mistakes his own cruelty and lust of power and fear for the voice of Heaven will torment us infinitely because he torments us with the approval of his own conscience and his better impulses appear to him as temptations."

C.S. Lewis, "A Reply to Professor Haldane" (1946)

Your professor is WRONG!

Theocracy is the best system of government but since people like you can't differentiate between THEOCRACY and AUTOCRACY the professor's comment make sense to you.

What you people misconstrued for THEOCRACY is AUTOCRACY in which the ruler is given unlimited power to do and undo while all the subjects are made to believe their ruler knows it all. But THEOCRACY is a form of government that's fair to one and all nobody is treated badly or unjustly under THEOCRATIC rule because the orders is from a perfect mind which is the SUPREME BEING: GOD

Nobody is above the law so the one sitting on the throne under THEOCRATIC rule is also subjected to the laws the power given him could be scored through pros and cons of the rule itself. So in no way is such a ruler a tyrant unlike the autocratic leader to whom everyone looks as if he/she is perfect whereas he/she is just human (fallib[quote author=MaxInDHouse post=118399086]Your professor is WRONG!

Theocracy is the best system of government but since people like you can't differentiate between THEOCRACY and AUTOCRACY the professor's comment make sense to you.

What you people misconstrued for THEOCRACY is AUTOCRACY in which the ruler is given unlimited power to do and undo while all the subjects are made to believe their ruler knows it all. But THEOCRACY is a form of government that's fair to one and all nobody is treated badly or unjustly under THEOCRATIC rule because the orders is from a perfect mind which is the SUPREME BEING: GOD

Nobody is above the law so the one sitting on the throne under THEOCRATIC rule is also subjected to the laws the power given him could be scored through pros and cons of the rule itself. So in no way is such a ruler a tyrant unlike the autocratic leader to whom everyone looks as if he/she is perfect whereas he/she is just human (fallible) like everyone else!

MaxInDHouse:
Nobody is imposing beliefs it's politics which is domination! Ecclesiastes 8:9

If you say "politics is domination', is domination not imposition? Mo ti nlọ!

Dtruthspeaker:
If you say "politics is domination', is domination not imposition? Mo ti nlọ!

Good!
It simply means some only want to impose their opinion on others that has nothing to do with BELIEF!

MaxInDHouse:
Politicians are the smartest atheists!

The same you said china politicians are theists, how come?

Maynman:
The same you said china politicians are theists, how come?

Chinese outsmarted the atheists using religion as cover to gain followers. They know you and know how intelligent you're that's why they voted you into the office. So use your brains which made them voted you in office and don't bring your idea of some God that cannot be questioned when you fvck up.

That's the idea.


But in other countries the atheist will claim he believes in some god yet he will be soliciting for support from people who are nonentities in the face of the god he professed.

For instance Donald Trump campaigned and was voted in but got into the office and started attacking gays and lesbians who voted him into the office claiming his God doesn't support their practices.

Do you think if he had told them this before hand Americans will vote him at all?

Well his stupidity caught up with him and they voted him out in the next election!

MaxInDHouse:
Chinese outsmarted the atheists using religion as cover to gain followers. They know you and know how intelligent you're that's why they voted you into the office. So use your brains which made them voted you in office and don't bring your idea of some God that cannot be questioned when you fvck up.

That's the idea.


But in other countries the atheist will claim he believes in some god yet he will be soliciting for support from people who are nonentities in the face of the god he professed.

For instance Donald Trump campaigned and was voted in but got into the office and started attacking gays and lesbians who voted him into the office claiming his God doesn't support their practices.

Do you think if he had told them this before hand Americans will vote him at all?

Well his stupidity caught up with him and they voted him out in the next election!

Once a Chinese becomes a politician, he automatically becomes a theist?
Cause who is the chinese? And who are the atheists?
Is it not the atheist that will later become a Chinese politician?
Atheism has nothing to do with intelligence just as theism has nothing to do with stupidity.

Trump has always been against lesbians and gays before he got into office. Can you show where he solicited for gay and lesbians before he got into office?
And how does your statement got to do with trump been an atheist, even the pope and some Pentecostal churches supports lgbtq rights.
And also during trump first election, most lgbtq voted MASSIVELY for hilary, and yet trump WON!

There are hundreds of religion that supports lgbtq, do you know what “atheism and theism” means?
Christianity is not the opposite of atheism, so if your religion especially your doctrine, out of other hundreds of religion and doctrines doesn’t support lgbtq that doesn’t make other religion atheists.
https://www.nairaland.com/7433608/church-england-paves-way-same-sex

budaatum:
It is "subjective nonsense" to you, and likely to me too, but that is hardly the point since the subjectivity of some is putting some in prison and even killing some.

If you know blasphemy is subjective, why did you call him a blasphemer?

1Sharon:
If you know blasphemy is subjective, why did you call him a blasphemer?

That's the description of the video itself.
Read it below yourself please.

Maynman:
Once a Chinese becomes a politician, he automatically becomes a theist?
Cause who is the chinese? And who are the atheists?
Is it not the atheist that will later become a Chinese politician?
Atheism has nothing to do with intelligence just as theism has nothing to do with stupidity.

Trump has always been against lesbians and gays before he got into office. Can you show where he solicited for gay and lesbians before he got into office?
And how does your statement got to do with trump been an atheist, even the pope and some Pentecostal churches supports lgbtq rights.
And also during trump first election, most lgbtq voted MASSIVELY for hilary, and yet trump WON!

There are hundreds of religion that supports lgbtq, do you know what “atheism and theism” means?
Christianity is not the opposite of atheism, so if your religion especially your doctrine, out of other hundreds of religion and doctrines doesn’t support lgbtq that doesn’t make other religion atheists.
https://www.nairaland.com/7433608/church-england-paves-way-same-sex

I know this will be really difficult for you to grasp but with time you will understand better!

MaxInDHouse:
I know this will be really difficult for you to grasp but with time you will understand better!

I know you don’t know what you are talking about.
You don’t have to use falsehood and baseless claims to promote your deity.