One of these threads has to be deleted, he posted this twice.

 Not according to several authorities on the matter.  Eerdman's DotB states on Blasphemy, "The act of cursing or slandering the name of God. It is not only an act committed against God (Exod. 22:28) but also an act of slandering, abusing, or reviling other people or groups (Rom. 3:8; 1 Cor. 4:13; 1 Pet. 4:4)."

Exodus 22:28, incidentally, proves this point when it states, "You shall not revile God, nor curse a ruler of your people."

Looking at revile - the root "vile" which comes from the Latin vilis, meaning to "cheap, worthless, base, common, despise."  All of these are pretty self explanitory, however despise comes from the Latin despicere which means to "look down on, scorn."    

Blaspheme, the breakdown is from the Greek, blaptikos (blaptikoz) "hurtful" and pheme (Feme) which means "utterance."

So literally, to Blaspheme is to make a hurtful utterance.  I would say this clearly is in line with what is said in 1 Timothy 1:13, " Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief."

But Blasphemy has no limitations on those of ignorance, and Paul blasphemed against Christ NOT against the Holy Spirit.  So the whole idea of Paul's forgiveness is irrelevant to the Blasphemy Challenge, as we are not denying God and Jesus in unity, but rather the Holy Spirit, which according to Luke, "He who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit WILL NOT BE FORGIVEN."  Nowhere does this connect to the purging of the demons, or the Pharisee's, nor does it talk of dividing nations, as this verse follows after Jesus rebukes a lawyer!

Also have you read the laws of the Old Testament lately?

By definition, you should be stoning us to death because we blasphemed.  And think...this is your book.  This is the book you consider to be the gateway to the salvation of your eternal soul, a book that orders you to kill.  Are you really okay with that?

First you must prove Jesus even existed.  What?  You didn't think it was going to be that easy, did you?

Read above and add:  How was rebuking lawyers in Luke 10:12 a miracle?  Commedians do this all the time on Comedy Central, in fact a movie called "Legally Blonde" was made to ridicule the profession in a way, does that make the director a miracle worker? 

Also, would you please care to stop twisting the definition of "blasphemy" around?  It's apparent you don't know what the word means, but to keep at it is rather poor in rgards to character.

 But you haven't yet set the definition of a real miracle.  What is something happens naturally that can not yet be explained by science and isn't a "miracle" at all?  How can you tell the difference between a real God-type miracle and a natural miracle? 

Further, when was the last time you saw the dead rise from the grave?

Do you have a Peer Reviewed historical journal, or some publication in a widely respected archaeological periodical that we can get this information from?   

Again, prove it.

Thanks for playing!

Since I work 19 hour days I don't have much free time so I would like to give feedback a little at a time.

Reading over all the definitions I could not find one of them that shows me saying "I deny the holy spirit"
as blasphemy. A person is not cursing or even saying anything bad.

Also the holy spirit is not the third person in a trinity. The bible does not talk about that.

The holy spirit is God's power here on earth. When you deny the holy spirit you are denying the power of God when you just saw it.

Okay so you just posted three times and told me you are going to post...?

Why don't you just post one reply and leave it at that when you have time? The fact is, I already showed you where, in fact, it DOES state that you can blaspheme the Holy Spirit in the Bible, and I showed you that denying the existence of the Holy Spirit IS blasphemy. I hope you go back and read what I wrote, and stop assuming what I wrote instead.

So now you've posted four completely worthless posts, while telling me you're going to post...look, you need to not post again until you have something substantial, k?

But you haven't SAID anything!  Here is your post progression so far:

Post 1:  I will post later

Post 2: That's not Blasphemy (you didn't refute one claim I made not provide any evidence)

Post 3: Read above post.

Post 4: I can't work this website.  I'll post later.

Post 5: You don't like what I've said in the four previous posts.

HELLO?!  You haven't said anything of substance in the past five posts.  You've made five posts and nothing at all worth my time.  In the time it took you to write five posts, you could have written one big one and took on mine.  Instead you keep making these irrelevant posts that have nothing to at all to do with the subject, and the only small, dinky post you made you didn't refute anything and didn't back up your claim.

Now, I don't know how many drugs you've taken today, but my point still stands.  You have two choices to make here.  You can either, 1.) continue to make these small, stupid insignificant posts and waste both our time, and make yourself look foolish or 2.) read my post in its entirety, respond to each point I make and refute it with evidence and look like you know something.  Those are your choices.  Choose.

That is now 6 posts and not one is worthwhile.  You continue to look like a fool.  And thank you for proving my point.