Chili

And you do not have to see it my way, but let me remind you that now with 20.000 denominations strong wherein they stand divided among each other, they will be united in one aim and that is to be the next wold government, and already have more Warfare equipment sunk at the bottom of the sea for wide-eyes fishes to bewilder than we have Cathedrals for people to see and admire in the glory of the good old days back then.

You should try to understand that freedom of religion is not a human right, since eternal life belongs to the mythology itself, and we borrow out temporal llife from them.

So, with that understood freedom to belief, or not believe, is a human right, they will fully agree, and so the "Inquisitor" was Ordered by the State to see if the conscious objector, in particular, was merely a non-believer or was a believer with an ideal of his own that he tried to foster with a vengeance inside the flock and so would scatter, that they saw like a wolf among their own.

And so now the Church was Ordered by State to deal with them properly and grant them their wish by reducing their purification time spend here on earth. They were always given a choice: it was either their punishment of choice, or repent and sit idle without disturbing their flock.

So the Church is never to blame, ever, since it was only enforcing State law and the 'recipe' handed to them was to die either at the foot of the cross, or whichever way they chose as their fancy, and so it was with tears in their eyes that the Church saw another good one of theirs go the wrong way.

All you need to do here is understand that freedom of religion is not a human right and should never be Constitional by force.

Sheshbazzar

The evil that inspired Tomás de Torquemada still walks among men. The earth will have no peace until his Whore is cast into the lake of fire.

Chili

Evil? Since when is enforcing State Law evil?

Just because the 'wild fire' had grown out of hand on account of their goodness, does not mean that they are validated in their error. Then, if the Jews became their shield of protection in the liberty that was granted to them as their eternal twin in origin sharing the same Genesis trunk, does not give them the right to become traitors to the religion that invited them in and granted them the symbiotic relation they sought with each other.

To convince yourself, try telling the USA govenment that you formed you own Constitution and now pay taxes to your own self, which, of course you can do. The answer you will get is that you can do this but not inside their eminent domain. Then, of course, if you insist and become obnoxious enough a shoot-out will follow, just try it and see.

Toto

Is there a point to this thread? Any objection if I close it?

Chili

Feel free as you see best.

mountainman

The point relates to the historical sense by which the idea of Jesus was associated with the majesty of the Roman state. How did this happen and who was responsible for the transfer of majesty from the Roman state to the figure of Jesus.

This is a valid question - optional answers have been listed. It would appear that the Emperor Constantine was responsible for this transfer of majesty, but other people may have other ideas.

You still have not stated why you think this thread involves meaningless terms.

Perhaps it is because in the current age and times the majesty of the historical jesus has lost a lot of ground. He is competing with Bob Marley, Harry Potter, Bilbo Baggins, Matthew Bellamy and MUSE for the limelight. However the OP involves the historical conception of where this majesty was initially derived. We only have to go back a few hundred years to see people being executed if they denied the majesty of the Jesus figure. Where did it all start? If it started with the New Testament, how did the NT get the majesty of the Roman state behind it if not for Constantine?

Toto

There is no one who denies the role of Constantine in making Jesus a governmentally supported entity.

If that is your only purpose, this thread can end, before it goes off on a tangent of Torquemada's role.

sotto voce

Every Protestant does that. You know, those who people who taught you to read.

It really is time to catch up with the second millennium, the dawn of rationality and the end of grunting shitheads!

And discussion that can be taken seriously in the real world.

Chili

Yes but it is wrong to associate Constantine with the Jesus figure who is left behind like a dirty rag in the Catholic Church, and that is my objection here.

However important Jesus may be as a means to the end (I am the way), that also means that he is not the end, and that so removes the majesty from him . . . except in the eyes of Jesus worshipers, even today on this discussion brd.

I take it as an insult to me in defense of the Church (and I never go to church, but that is not the point). We are talking about truth here that must be defended.

Toto

?? Name one.

Most Protestants seem to think that Christianity took a wrong turn with Constantine and his governmental support.