blackbird

God gave man freedom of choice. But also gave man direction on how to live and what to believe. Man will be held accountable in God's plan. " Topical Encyclopedia Blasphemy, defined as the act of showing contempt or lack of reverence for God, is a grave sin in the biblical context. The Bible addresses the consequences of blasphemy in both the Old and New Testaments, underscoring its seriousness and the divine judgment it incurs. Old Testament Context In the Old Testament, blasphemy is explicitly condemned and is considered a capital offense. Leviticus 24:16 states, "Whoever blasphemes the name of the LORD must surely be put to death. The whole congregation must stone him. Whether an alien or a native, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death." This severe penalty reflects the holiness of God's name and the seriousness with which the Israelites were to regard it. The narrative of Naboth's vineyard in 1 Kings 21 illustrates the misuse of blasphemy accusations. Jezebel orchestrates false charges of blasphemy against Naboth to seize his property, leading to his unjust execution. This account highlights the potential for abuse of blasphemy laws and the moral corruption that can ensue when God's commandments are manipulated for personal gain. New Testament Context In the New Testament, the focus shifts from legal penalties to spiritual consequences. Jesus addresses blasphemy in Matthew 12:31-32 , saying, "Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the one to come." This passage introduces the concept of the unforgivable sin, emphasizing the gravity of attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to evil. The Apostle Paul, in his letters, also warns against blasphemy. In 1 Timothy 1:20 , he mentions Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom he "handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme." This disciplinary action underscores the need for correction and repentance in the face of blasphemous behavior. Theological Implications Blasphemy is not merely a verbal offense but a reflection of the heart's posture towards God. It signifies a willful rejection of God's authority and holiness. The consequences of blasphemy, therefore, extend beyond earthly punishment to spiritual alienation from God. The Bible consistently calls for reverence and respect for God's name, urging believers to uphold His holiness in thought, word, and deed. Practical Considerations For believers, the biblical teaching on blasphemy serves as a caution against irreverence and a reminder of the sanctity of God's name. It encourages a lifestyle of worship and respect, recognizing the power and majesty of the Creator. The community of faith is called to address blasphemy with both truth and grace, seeking restoration and repentance for those who have fallen into this sin." Topical Bible: Consequences of Blasphemy

I don't think your god is the true God of the Bible.

I never said someone needed to go to jail. That is your idea with your extreme comments. I don't think people in public places like coffee shops should be able to shout profanities and offend other people in the premises. Maybe a small fine would be appropriate. "Causing a Disturbance: If you are in a public place such as a shopping mall or nightclub and you engage in disorderly conduct such as fighting, screaming, insulting people or using obscene language, you could be charged with causing a disturbance under s.175 (1) of the Criminal Code. The Supreme Court has ruled your behaviour has to be more than annoying and it must have disrupted the peace enjoyed by others. Though this is a minor offence, you could be fined up to $5,000 or jailed for two years less a day." According to this law, it is unlikely profanity would be enough to be charged for, but it would depend on the circumstances and nature of it. There may be an exception if it is causing a disturbance.

"Chris Selley: B.C.’s draconian Trump-emergency bill repeats lessons we failed to learn from COVID British Columbia Premier David Eby says he and his cabinet need sweeping new powers with which to be “nimble” in the face of economic threats from Washington. His NDP government’s Bill 7 would allow it to make regulations “addressing challenges” from abroad, or indeed for any purpose “supporting the economy of British Columbia and Canada.” These are things like tolling American trucks travelling through B.C. to Alaska — which Alaska is not happy about — and altering procurement rules to exclude American companies. On the bright side, the bill promises to eliminate all trade barriers between B.C. and the rest of Canada. On the dark side: Under Bill 7, all of this can happen with no debate in the B.C. legislature. As a result, quite rightly, reviews have been worse than mixed. “This bill appears to be an attempt to use the threat of economic crisis to justify a cynical power grab,” Josh Dehaas, counsel for the Canadian Constitution Foundation, said in a statement . Writing at The Line , veteran B.C. correspondent Rob Shaw called it “the most extraordinary piece of legislation tabled in this province since the Second World War” — and no, not in a good way. No other Canadian governments have proposed anything like this, but it would be foolhardy to assume they won’t sit up, take notice and perhaps raise a jealous eyebrow. And one needn’t resort to hyperbole or conspiracy to imagine where it might end. One of the ultimate inconveniences in a time of crisis is going to the polls at all, and war is a pretty common reason for delaying elections in democracies — from Ontario during the Second World War to modern-day Ukraine . Parliament at the most consequential time for our province since Eby himself called this “the most consequential time for our province since the Second World War.” I’m not suggesting the premier, the former head of the B.C. Civil Liberties Union, is planning some sort of coup (though my goodness, has he ever come a long way from that post !). But it’s worrisome enough he thought he could get away with Bill 7. And it speaks, I suspect, to how we handle full-blown crises in this country — which is rarely, not very well, and with a minimum of lesson-learning going on the aftermath. The threat of Donald Trump is not much like the early-days threat of COVID-19, which landed on our heads like a sandbag five years ago this week, except inasmuch as it is brand new to everyone who’s alive right now; we have no idea what will help; and it’s stretching our basic capacities as a nation, as a federation, to the breaking point. This is the main reason I keep banging the drum for further and much more intense inquiry into Canada’s pandemic response, and will continue banging that drum, until I suppose my editor takes it away from me forever: It’s not just that we need to massively improve our infection-response at every single level — from doctors’ offices to long-term care homes to border crossings — but our crisis-response in general. We are reliably struck dumb by history. One of the very unfortunate effects of the pandemic was how many people seemed to emerge from it supremely confident that their preferred approach had been the correct one. On the one extreme: “Canada’s death toll is much lower than the United States’, and the U.S. had far fewer and less stringent lockdowns, so lockdowns work.” On the other, “Lockdowns have been completely discredited and no Canadian politician would ever implement them again in a similar situation.” I suspect some very basic data would surprise people at this point. Throughout most of the pandemic, our debates over which measures to implement and which not to were often poisoned by our success relative to the United States, especially, but also various European nations. Looking back on the full scope of COVID-19, the numbers paint a somewhat more complicated portrait. At 1,538 deaths per million people, Canada is in the same basic league as Switzerland (1,647), Denmark (1,511) and Israel (1,363). Even Norway, which was keeping the death toll in check better than just about anywhere in Europe, finished at 1,204 deaths per million. Now consider: According to UNESCO data, Norway’s schools were fully closed for just four weeks, and Denmark’s for just eight. By June 2021, the Ontario Science Table reported at the time, schools had been closed province-wide — never mind regionally — for 19 weeks in Ontario, the most of any province. British Columbia closed schools province-wide for just nine weeks, and for most of the pandemic had the lowest death tolls and the least stringent lockdowns … but in the end, wound up with more deaths per capita than Ontario . These things need investigating, not least as the evidence continues to mount of the harm school closures inevitably did to children — how could it not? But the urge to accept good times when they return is great. We need to be so much more curious and forward-looking than we have recently been as a nation. This is a country whose government disbanded its special Canada-U.S. relations committee, struck during Trump’s first term, because 77-year-old Joe Biden had been elected and all our troubles were presumably over. " Chris Selley: B.C.’s draconian Trump-emergency bill repeats lessons we failed to learn from COVID

News article: quote Chris Selley: B.C.’s draconian Trump-emergency bill repeats lessons we failed to learn from COVID British Columbia Premier David Eby says he and his cabinet need sweeping new powers with which to be “nimble” in the face of economic threats from Washington. His NDP government’s Bill 7 would allow it to make regulations “addressing challenges” from abroad, or indeed for any purpose “supporting the economy of British Columbia and Canada.” These are things like tolling American trucks travelling through B.C. to Alaska — which Alaska is not happy about — and altering procurement rules to exclude American companies. On the bright side, the bill promises to eliminate all trade barriers between B.C. and the rest of Canada. On the dark side: Under Bill 7, all of this can happen with no debate in the B.C. legislature. As a result, quite rightly, reviews have been worse than mixed. “This bill appears to be an attempt to use the threat of economic crisis to justify a cynical power grab,” Josh Dehaas, counsel for the Canadian Constitution Foundation, said in a statement . Writing at The Line , veteran B.C. correspondent Rob Shaw called it “the most extraordinary piece of legislation tabled in this province since the Second World War” — and no, not in a good way. No other Canadian governments have proposed anything like this, but it would be foolhardy to assume they won’t sit up, take notice and perhaps raise a jealous eyebrow. And one needn’t resort to hyperbole or conspiracy to imagine where it might end. One of the ultimate inconveniences in a time of crisis is going to the polls at all, and war is a pretty common reason for delaying elections in democracies — from Ontario during the Second World War to modern-day Ukraine ." Chris Selley: B.C.’s draconian Trump-emergency bill repeats lessons we failed to learn from COVID

You want the right to insult and mock Christians and God. The moment you take your last breath you'll REGRET your decision to reject God.

We have seen samples of the moves toward removing freedom from the people. The liberal left political parties and movements are basically pagan in nature and therefore do not hold strong beliefs about the human rights and dignity of the individual. Their ideology is man-made. In the case of the NDP they believe it is evil for anyone to become more prosperous or wealthy than someone they deem as average or middle class. They prove this by their repeated statements against corporate leaders or investors who own corporations and their willingness to confiscate their wealth. Obviously they don't think the right to own private property exists. In their mind, they are the arbiters of who owns what and they can confiscate property at any time if they ever get enough political power. We see the ideology of disrespect for democracy and the will of the people in the B.C. NDP government with their recent Bill 7. This bill gives absolute power to the cabinet or executive of the government to change laws and do things arbitrarily without the approval of the elected MLAs, that is, without the democratic right to debate and vote in the legislative assembly, which is the people's elected representatives.

Yes, maybe you're right. God wishes that all would be saved, that is, believe and be born again. But I think you indicated you were not interested. I respect everyone's choice. Ultimately, salvation depends on the divine grace of God and His divine purpose. I like to study the Bible on different subjects. God's divine purposes is a mind-boggling subject.

I would suggest you seek counseling from a Christian counsellor if there is such a thing these days.

Of course. I never advocated anyone go around insulting anybody. It may already be illegal under human rights laws. I do. People like you are trying to take it away. Nonsense. You are lying again. You don't lose freedom by being respectful of other people. No need to be profane and blasphemous.

No, Jesus was not a progressive if you mean teaching kids LGBTQ lifestyles or agreeing with same-sex marriage. Jesus was not advocating any kind of political ideology or Socialist government. If anything he would likely support capitalism because he was God and God ordained the right to private property.

I believe that a degree of respect for other people's rights should be normal. That is the nature of a civilized society. One shouldn't be able to go around and insult and disparage other people. Freedom carries with it a responsibility to be respectful of other people. Remember where your freedom came from. A civilized society didn't just happen by accident. It took a lot of people to struggle for it and many sacrificed their lives as martyrs for the cause. The Reformation which took place four to five hundred years ago in Europe led to the breakup of the Holy Roman Empire run by Rome in a number of countries of Europe. In some countries, after a long struggle, freedom from the total control by Rome was finally achieved and individual freedom was gradually born.

If one doesn't believe in individual freedom and less government control, then one must believe in the opposite which is Socialism or Marxism. Since you don't believe in conservative beliefs, you must believe in some form of Socialism or Marxism. You either believe in individual freedom or you don't. You either believe in less government control or more. Not difficult to grasp.

I believe this fact is not widely known. The Reformation which took place four to five hundred years ago in some areas of Europe led to the Holy Roman Empire run by Rome being broken up in a number of countries of Europe. In some countries, after a long struggle, freedom from the total control by Rome was finally brought to an end and individual freedom was gradually born. Foxe's Book of Martyrs tells us in the introduction: "In all ages, we find that a disposition to persecute for opinion’s sake, has been manifested by wicked men, whatever may have been their opinions or sentiments on religious subjects. The intolerant jew, and the bigoted pagan, have exhibited no more of a persecuting spirit, than the nominal professor of Christianity, and the infidel and the avowed atheist. Indeed, it seems to be an “inherent vice,” in unsanctified nature to endeavour by the pressure of physical force, to restrain obnoxious sentiments, and to propagate favourite opinions. It is only when the heart has been renewed and sanctified by divine grace, that men have rightly understood and practised the true principles of toleration." Persecution was practiced for the past 2,000 years throughout the world and resulted in the loss of countless lives. Those were the martyrs described in the book Foxe's Book of Martyrs available from many sellers on Amazon and also available to read online at some websites. The Holy Roman Inquisition is also recounted in many books available on Amazon and also available online to read on the archive.org website. The Reformation which resulted in a struggle in certain countries of Europe over a long period of time beginning in the 14th to 16th centuries resulted in a number of countries in northern Europe breaking free from the shackles of Rome which previously had dominated everyone's life through their control of kings, queen, emperors, and local government authorities and church clergy. The accused sometimes received the death penalty if convicted of heresy. Rome used the tool of the Holy Roman Inquisition for four hundred years to enforce Rome's totalitarian system on the western world through the middle ages. The Reformation eventually led these countries to adopt democratic systems, human rights such as freedom of religion, freedom of conscience and freedom of speech. These freedoms were essentially non-existent in the western world for at least a thousand years in the 16th century. The Bible had been banned from the common people and all teachings had to come from the church clergy and hierarchy. The Reformation changed everything and people demanded the right to believe what they themselves determined and the right to speak what they believed. Many lost their lives in this struggle for freedom and we should take the time to acknowledge those who suffered and gave their lives for the freedom we enjoy today. We should never take it for granted. There are powers that be that would if they had the chance take away our freedoms and bring us under their system.

How have Canadians been "right wing that Trump personifies"? You are trying to make a false narrative about conservatives. I told you to read the CPC policies on their website but you ignore and just make false statements instead. There is nothing on there to tie the CPC to Trump or MAGA people.

No, I outsmarted you. I simple told you I don't spend my life following Trump and his politics.

This is Canada, not the U.S. so why should we be listening to Trump? We don't spend a lot of time paying attention to everything going on in the U.S.

Maybe, but I wasn't advocating Trump on here anyway. I wasn't involved the U.S. election or following every detail of what was going on there. I am a Canadian and, like most people, I don't have time to follow everything in the U.S elections.

I don't recall supporting Trump before the election and always had my concerns about him. Nobody knew what his true agenda was until after the election or understood what his real plans were. Who knew before the election that he was going to launch a trade war and think that would make sense?

Poilievre says Trump wants Liberals in power to keep Canada 'weak' | Watch

" Move over Trudeau, Trump has a new choice to be Canada’s governor. When it comes to who President Donald J. Trump would prefer to run America’s “51st state,” he’s made it clear Prime Minister Mark Carney would get his vote as Canadians wonder when they will get a chance to cast theirs. As for Trump’s endorsement of Carney, Conservative Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre said it’s perfectly fine with him. “I’d rather deal with a Liberal than a conservative,” the U.S. President told Laura Ingraham on FOX News Tuesday. The polls, since Carney become Liberal leader on March 9, now indicate the landscape of voter support has gone from a big lead for the Conservatives to a neck and neck tie. And some polls now show the Liberals are actually surging ahead." https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/politics/warmington-trump-prefers-to-deal-with-carney-rather-than-poilievre/ar-AA1BeRI1?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=97b5aa5b96fd480eb138a85d07c19936&ei=11 Here is your chance liberals. Choose Carney and Trump will be glad to deal with him and get you a deal. Not saying what kind of deal though. The news report on CTV just said it: Trump prefers to deal with someone who is meek and gentle towards him because he is a bully and prefers to be able to bully people into doing things his way. Carney fits that bill. Pierre Poilievre not so much. PP would stand up to Trump and Trump hates that. Do we want more of a strong guard dog to deal with a bully or a sheep dog? This is where PP's experience in fighting back against Trudeau and the Liberals in Parliament and out of Parliament will pay off.

"There is no polite way to say this. Government spending is enemy number one. In Winnipeg. In Manitoba. In Canada. If we want to save this country from fiscal collapse, we need to stop pretending we can have it all. We can’t. We need hard decisions, and we need them now." "Here are just a few examples of federal government spending that have sparked outrage — even among those who aren’t typically concerned with budgets. · $1.7 million went to fund a musical called Lesbian Pirates. Yes, you read that right. It was part of Global Affairs Canada’s diversity programming in 2022-2023. You can find that in their reports, and it’s been widely discussed on social media. While people line up at food banks in Winnipeg, your federal government spent millions to fund niche entertainment projects overseas. · $50 million was pledged in 2024 to train midwives in South Sudan. Again, it fits the Feminist International Assistance Policy (FIAP), but it’s a questionable priority when Canadians can’t access their own family doctors. What’s the message here? Canadians can wait, but South Sudan gets fast-tracked?" KLEIN: Government spending is enemy number one I don't support or agree with Trump, but this kind of spending by Trudeau and the Liberals, if Trump ever got wind of it, would just add gas to the fire of his anger. This would be especially true when he knows Canada does not contribute its share to NATO or the defence of Canada and expects America to protect Canada. Unfortunately Liberal ideology is to spend, spend and spend more. They seem to have lost all reason and are willing to let the debt build up. As more money must go to service the debt, there will be less money available for services. At some point the government will not be able to provide the services that the people demand because they won't have the money and the prices of everything will be so high that the people won't be able to pay more taxes. So what happens when the government declares bankruptcy or inability to provide the services that people have grown to depend on? Maybe that is what it will take for people to learn there is no free lunch kind of government.

Again you are being very deceptive. Did you read the information? "For starters, taxes and fees imposed by governments and airports account for 25 to 35 per cent of airfare costs in Canada." That is a lot more than $3. You didn't mention all the other fees and taxes. For a ticket of $300, all the taxes and fees would add up to around $100 on average if it adds 25 to 35 per cent.

Looks like you are trying to start a debate to insult or mock Christianity; I don't have time for that nonsense.

You tell a lot about yourself.