Posted on 05/22/2006 8:14:10 AM PDT by RightWingAtheist
Consider Constantine, he was a grotesque tyrant, put off being baptized until he was on his deathbed, now he's a saint.
Just because the Catholic church calls someone a saint, doesn't necessarily make them one. On the other hand, just because you call someone a grotesque tyrant, doesn't necessarily make him one either.
God decides whether he was a saint or not. Water, Baptism doesn't save you. And deathbed baptisms were apparently common in the 4th century.
One minor correction: at that time there was no Catholic or Orthodox or Protestant - just Christians and heretics.
True. But you assume Constantine was a saint, because the Catholic church evenutally designated him as one and/or because he was baptized and/or because he declared Christianity the state religion.
I understand he allowed and protected worshippers of other religions than Christianity, just not witches and spiritists. So he did practice some religious tolerance.
As opposed to drowning infants in a Swiss river because you disagree with their parent's interpretation of the Bible?
You'll end up catering to homosexuals.
You mean as opposed to declaring "righteous" incestuous child molestors like Lot, or sending Mideanite grandchildren of people whose grandparents taught your grandparents to dance around a golden calf off to be garroted or enslaved, depending on whether they are virgins or not?
You'll end up killing your disabled, because they are inconvenient.
As opposed to killing off hundreds of thousands of useless, annoying old women because the bible says "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"?
Pot, kettle, black?
The bible confirms that there are, in fact, spirits, that they can, in fact, be contacted for good purposes, and that, therefore, mediums may very well be doing a legitimate useful business.
Thanks for all the helpful information. Where would we be without alert spiritists such as yourself?
I'll alert the National Science Foundation of this incontrovertable evidence for the existence of spiritual possession.
And was that a yes? How do you normally expect to prosecute people for performing witchcraft and spiritism? Voodoo dolls?
That's a religeous opinion--to those of us who wish the state would restrict itself to prosecuting tort crimes against person and property, it looks like you recruiting the state to do your religeous wet work.
And, likewise, just because the catholic church says a just morality can only arise from the bible, doesn't necessarily make that true, either.
Eh? Israel did not subscribe to the Laws of Moses? Did they eat bats?
Regardless of the purpose in contacting them, and regardless of whether they help or not. Contacting them is strictly forbidden by God and it is evil to do so.
If I was lobbying to change our laws, then I would be recruiting the state. The only reason it was brought up, is that you asked if it would be moral, and I issued a qualified yes.
Your misreading it. I didn't say it was not a crime. I said the crimes were equal.
The Bible itself agrees with you. Morality also arises from our conscience. Hindus won't be condemned because of what the Bible says. Hindus will be condemned because they did things they knew were wrong.
Those that never did anything against their conscience will not be condemned. Unfortunately, God who knows the future, has already weighed in, that none of us achieve that.
Personally, I think the whole catholic tradition of declaring past Christians as saints is a bit silly. All true Christians are saints. But only God knows our hearts as to whether we are true Christians.
Yea, well, God says not to eat pork, and to kill old woman who dabble with supernatural forces, and that marrying my niece isn't incest, and that it's a good idea to deliver the virgin 10 year old daughters of neighbors you've invaded and slaughtered into slavery. It's possible that a rational person might not consider this an irresistable argument.
Oh, indeed. Torquemada, for example, wasn't doing anything against his conscience. Neither was Hitler, or Stalin, or Mao. The all thought they were doing the most honorable thing they could with the challenges and limitations they were faced with. As a christian religeous argument about morality, this seems pretty much out on the ragged edge of bizarre.
I didn't realize you had such outstanding powers of mind reading across time. Why don't you report that to the National Academy of Science too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.