The Ultimate Loophole?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MarianD
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m not going to stop asking you to back up the bold claims you make here simply because you post really big pictures of Freud.
Christians always misquote his statements, so go ahead and add to the pile.
You still have to back up your bold claims that God is proven by science.
That, you can NOT do.
 
Cat_Herder said:
That’s not Freud. :rotfl: (It’s Einstein; did you actually click him?)

Don’t ask a cat herder what (s)he can’t do. 😃
Click to expand...
You have done no such thing.

There is zero scientific evidence of God as you believe in him, or anyone else does. Science does not even ask the question. Not real science. Behe’s son is an athiest restricted to the basement. Think about that.

I hated your super huge image of Einstien so much that I wondered if it were some Freudian thing you had for really big pictures. My mistake to have him on the mind then.
 
StrawberryJam said:
You have done no such thing.

There is zero scientific evidence of God as you believe in him, or anyone else does. Science does not even ask the question. Not real science. Behe’s son is an athiest regulated to the basement. Think about that.
Click to expand...
Science does ask the question of where the Universe came from. The answers don’t bode well for atheism.

And besides, who are you to determine what is and isn’t real science? Respectfully, Dr. Einstein is more qualified than you to do so. Professor, take it away.

Albert Einstein said:
“I’m not an atheist, and I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations.”
Click to expand...
 
Cat_Herder said:
Science does ask the question of where the Universe came from. The answers don’t bode well for atheism.

And besides, who are you to determine what is and isn’t real science? Einstein is more qualified than you to do so. Professor, take it away.
Click to expand...
Here we go again, as if an athiest or agnostic has not heard this one before you came along.
It must feel the same way when a protestant asks if a pope can sin, or if you are praying to idols or some such thing that is obtuse, false and stupid.
You must not live in a cave, so I assume you know that science has no Pope that claims science has spoken, case closed! Unlike your problem.
 
StrawberryJam said:
It must feel the same way when a protestant asks if a pope can sin, or if you are praying to idols or some such thing that is obtuse, false and stupid.
You must not live in a cave, so I assume you know that science has no Pope that claims science has spoken, case closed! Unlike your problem.
Click to expand...
You just admitted that you have no way of knowing whether what I have said is, in fact, “obtuse, false, [or] stupid.”
 
Cat_Herder said:
You just admitted that you have no way of knowing whether what I have said is, in fact, “obtuse, false, [or] stupid.”
Click to expand...
I would say it could be equal amounts of all of the three things. Nothing more.🙂
 
Anyway… this topic is supposed to be about whether Constantine slipped through a loophole, so if you are interested in whether God exists, go write on my wall.
StrawberryJam said:
Is this a fear based belief then?
Click to expand...
No. God does not deal in fear. A person who refuses to be baptized is acting out of disrespect for communion with God and with his or her neighbor. I’m sure you’re aware of Jesus’s many admonitions about loving the Lord and loving one’s neighbor.
 
MarianD said:
Has anyone noticed this loophole before, and how has the Church closed it?

I think the earliest person to known have used this loophole is Constantine I (which is why I’m glad the Catholic Church doesn’t consider him a Saint).

Basically, here’s the loophole:
  • Sins are washed away through Baptism
  • Sins are also removed through Confirmation
  • Therefore, it is possible for one to believe 100% in Christ, sin as much as he/she wants, and get Baptized and/or Confirmed while one his/her deathbed to remove the sins he/she committed while in health
Click to expand...
Just one correction, confirmation doesn’t remove sins.

Baptism does that, but you can be baptised only once. Confession, otoh, there is no limit to how many times one can confess and receive absolution. 🙂

As for one waiting for a deathbed conversion, or baptism, and timing it perfectly,
  • that’s risky beyond belief.
  • A person who is up to their neck in sin, thinking they can game the system, and time the sacraments perfectly, is in reality, probably not going to call a priest. Besides, If a person is only interested in changing on their deathbed, not before, there is the issue of sincerity
M:
Now the most common response to this loophole that I’ve heard is “Well if one really cared about Christ, that person wouldn’t sin”. Such an argument is weak to say the least, oversimplifies the complexity of the human struggle with sin, and mimics the faith-only Protestant argument (“if one really had faith, then that person would do good works, but faith is the only thing that saves us”).

Another response I could think of is “presumption is a sin”. While this is true, sins are washed away through Baptism and removed through Confirmation, so the sin of presumption would be removed as well.

So, in theory, I could commit as many sins as I want before I am confirmed, knowing that through my confirmation, these sins will be removed. Not saying I would do that, but I’m saying that it seems like I can.

So what’s the Church’s way of closing this loophole?
Click to expand...
Actually, it’s not any more of a loophole than confession/absolution, or the last rites. Both of which take away all sin. And we know all the sacraments will be always with us. 🙂

Constantine, in effect, by thinking as he did, showed how foolish he was, and how poor his understanding of the faith was.
 
StrawberryJam said:
Desire of an eternal afterlife is so important? The fear of eternal hell is so important?
Both things no one knows is for certain.

Leaving many to leave things undone that could be done now to help more now.😦
Click to expand...
Okay. I don’t understand that last sentence. But let me ask you this: what have you got to lose by assuming that there is a heaven and a hell?

Suppose you assume that there is, and live accordingly; and the reality is that there isn’t. Well, then, you’ve led a good life. But suppose you assume that there is not, so you go out and do whatever you please, indulging all your whims and passions, putting your desires first above everything else. Then you die, and find out that there is in fact a heaven and a hell. Which one do you think you’d end up in?
 
MarianD said:
Has anyone noticed this loophole before, and how has the Church closed it?
I think the earliest person to known have used this loophole is Constantine I (which is why I’m glad the Catholic Church doesn’t consider him a Saint).
Click to expand...
I think that most of what was said here has been well addressed by others. One thing no one seems to have addressed is the penitential system as it existed at the time of Constantine. The sacrament of penance was much more difficult to receive then. The sins requiring the sacrament for forgiveness were fewer, but were the real biggies such as adultery, apostasy, and a few others. I seem to also recall that habitual or repeated sins were dealt with much more harshly and being “excommunicated” and perhaps not being allowed to return much more common. Hence the practice of confessing one’s sins could be quite a trying and difficult procedure.

It’s a loophole like the loop of a noose around ones neck, one stumble could be ones last and then the judgement. 🙂
 
I feel like I am so repetitious. It isn’t about slipping into heaven. It is about loving God in a relationship based upon His being the first to love us. To being this wonderful gift down to an attempt to fool God and be baptized at the end of our lives would simply limit a limitless source of grace and joy in our lives. If I am more interested in the things of God,ie, loving my neighbor as God has loved me, then how could I ever chose to wait for that all encompassing love?

I know the OP was asking about the legalistic view of Baptism, but why would I want to go to heaven for eternity when I have never gotten to know any of the people who we know are in heaven. God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, Mary and all the Saints are here for us to know and we should want to know them. But if I am trying to slide into heaven as the door is coming down on my earthly life, I will not have cheated God, but I will have cheated myself out of the Grace and communion with God and His church during my time here.

Peace

Stan
 
MarianD said:
Has anyone noticed this loophole before, and how has the Church closed it?

I think the earliest person to known have used this loophole is Constantine I (which is why I’m glad the Catholic Church doesn’t consider him a Saint).

Basically, here’s the loophole:
  • Sins are washed away through Baptism
  • Sins are also removed through Confirmation
  • Therefore, it is possible for one to believe 100% in Christ, sin as much as he/she wants, and get Baptized and/or Confirmed while one his/her deathbed to remove the sins he/she committed while in health
Now the most common response to this loophole that I’ve heard is “Well if one really cared about Christ, that person wouldn’t sin”. Such an argument is weak to say the least, oversimplifies the complexity of the human struggle with sin, and mimics the faith-only Protestant argument (“if one really had faith, then that person would do good works, but faith is the only thing that saves us”).

Another response I could think of is “presumption is a sin”. While this is true, sins are washed away through Baptism and removed through Confirmation, so the sin of presumption would be removed as well.

So, in theory, I could commit as many sins as I want before I am confirmed, knowing that through my confirmation, these sins will be removed. Not saying I would do that, but I’m saying that it seems like I can.

So what’s the Church’s way of closing this loophole?
Click to expand...
This isn’t at all a loophole; it’s wonderful news! Of course, the baptism and confirmation must be accompanied by true contrition and intention.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top