Do You See Anything Wrong With This Picture?

[Groo the Wanderer]

[quote name='Budge' post='1217619' date='Mar 23 2007, 09:30 AM']To Paladin...That lady is supposed to be a "Christian right"? with full access to scriptures and being taught by your Magisterium etc? Shouldnt she know what is right or wrong? She appears to be of Hispanic ancestry so even if she is not American born she is most likely from an area that has been Catholic dominated with 500 years to get it right.[/quote]


So now yer saying she's 500 years old? Funny...doesn't look a day over 350 to me... Either that or yer saying that we have 'racial memories' by holding her responsible for 500 years of ancestral learning.

Your 'arguments' are getting thinner and thinner with each post. Methinks you will be coming home soon..really and truly.

[Groo the Wanderer]

[quote name='Budge' post='1217619' date='Mar 23 2007, 09:30 AM']Ugh, bad Catholic Bible translations...[/quote]


Umm...Budge. I KNOW you know better. The Catholic Church WROTE the entire New Testamant and compiled the Bible. Do we really have to go there again?

[theculturewarrior]

Here is what I see wrong in this picture:

I see social injustice. The people in that picture don't wear the gold watches and jewelry you see at evangelical services, and it is quite possible that they are subjected to discrimination on a daily basis, and are in dire need of a sign of hope.

I see people who do not know enough about Mary or her miracles, probably because nobody took the time to teach them, or because they don't have a means of accessing the information themselves.

I do not see an abomination to God. God may very well be pleased by their devotion, uninformed though it may be. Who are you to judge, Budge?

[Mr.Cat]

[quote name='Budge' post='1217619' date='Mar 23 2007, 09:30 AM']Ugh, bad Catholic Bible translations...

Gen 19:1 ¶ And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing [them] rose up to meet them; and [b]he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;
[/b][/quote]The best translation of "[i]veneruntque duo angeli Sodomam vespere sedente Loth in foribus civitatis qui cum vidisset surrexit et ivit obviam eis adoravitque pronus in terra[/i]" is "[b]And the two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of the city. And seeing them, he rose up and went to meet them: and worshipped prostrate to the ground,[/b]"

The Latin Vulgate was written by Saint Jerome and used by Christians for nearly a thousand and three hundred years without any other writing, so its antiquity is not in question. Protestant scholars even look to the Latin Vulgate since it so closely and carefully translate the original writings of the Sacred Scriptures. We do not see this change in “translation” until a little after the supposed Protestant Reformation (more properly called Deformation). So what this claims is Christianity and all the most intelligent men of their fields got this wrong for thousands of years?

Moreover, Protestants generally recognize that in the scriptures there is no difference between the words of honor, veneration, and worship. The reason why Lot can still “venerate” the angels and this is the apologetic point of this verse. If we are forbidden to give honor to anyone but God then Lot committed a grave sin here and the Angels refused to correct him. So the point is still served even in light of the inferior translation.

Moreover, how do you bow your face to the ground without simply bowing? There are other places in the Scriptures were they simply “bow” but they do not mention a bowing of the face. Even in this translation Lot is prostrated even though they leave out a word or two attempting to make it more compatible to Protestant theology.

[Paladin]

And really, either way:

pros·trate
verb (used with object)
1. to cast (oneself) face down on the ground in humility, submission, or adoration.
2. to lay flat, as on the ground.
[i]Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006[/i]

So either translation is correct.

You are correct, Budge. Mexico has a long tradition of Christianity going back 500 years. In fact, it was a little under 500 years ago that Mary appeared to a [url="http://www.sancta.org/juandiego.html"]native Aztec Mexican[/url] to spread the Faith throughout the nation and people. Ever since, Our Lady has been the emblem and patroness of the Mexican people. So it shouldn't surprise anyone that a Mexicana finds a religious connection with Mary.

Is she mistaken in thinking that a stain is a divine apparition? Probably. But for cultural, historical, and religious reasons, one can see why she might think God was sending her an image of the Blessed Virgin as a sign of covenant and blessing.

[Budge]

[quote]I see social injustice. The people in that picture don't wear the gold watches and jewelry you see at evangelical services, and it is quite possible that they are subjected to discrimination on a daily basis, and are in dire need of a sign of hope.[/quote]

Isnt that a bit presumptious to assume they are poor simply because they are Hispanic? They are casually dressed but they could be upper middle class for all we know and she brought the boys over in her new SUV.

Money doesnt mean safety from religious delusion.

Edited March 23, 2007 by Budge

[Budge]

[quote]You are correct, Budge. Mexico has a long tradition of Christianity going back 500 years. In fact, it was a little under 500 years ago that Mary appeared to a native Aztec Mexican to spread the Faith throughout the nation and people. Ever since, Our Lady has been the emblem and patroness of the Mexican people. So it shouldn't surprise anyone that a Mexicana finds a religious connection with Mary.[/quote]

You know what I think of the apparitions, they are not "mary" at all but another being meant to bring confusion and delusion.

I believe this is one reason Mexico was left in religious darkness for so many centuries....at least things are changing now via Christian evangelical missionaries.

[Proud2BCatholic139]

When in doubt, bless it with Holy Water, and say a prayer.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Budge' post='1217891' date='Mar 23 2007, 05:39 PM']You know what I think of the apparitions, they are not "mary" at all but another being meant to bring confusion and delusion.

I believe this is one reason Mexico was left in religious darkness for so many centuries....at least things are changing now via Christian evangelical missionaries.[/quote]
Budge, in case you didn't know, Mexico at the time of the apparition of Our Lady of Guadalupe was almost entirely Aztec. Although the Spanish kept them from practicing their religion, the Aztecs, as you know, practiced massive amounts of human sacrifice. Because of the apparition, however, 8 million Aztecs were converted to Christianity in a relatively short amount of time. Compare that to the 6 million who were lost to the Protestant Reformation around the same time.

If they were left in darkness because of the apparition, I'd like to hear what you think of the Aztec religion.

God bless,

Micah

[Budge]

Did you know the Lady of Guadalupe is given the name of an Aztec goddess as well?

Really I see the marian worship in Latin America as simply different forms of pagan religions.

Remember I did the "goddess" junk while UU, aint nothing new to me!

[url="http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/guadalup.html"]VIRGIN OF GUADALUPE AND AZTEC gODDESS TOO?[/url]
[quote]epeyac had for centuries been of significance to the people of what is now called Mexico – the Aztecs and their descendants – because it was the site of a shrine to the goddess Tonantzin.

Tonantzin (pictured above left), associated with the snake goddess Coatlique (perhaps cognate with the Judaeo-Christian Eve), was worshipped in the Winter Solstice celebrations at around this time of year. Tonantzin wore a white robe covered in feathers and seashells, which adorned her as the goddess promenaded among the worshippers and was ceremonially killed in a scene reminiscent of the apparent death of the sun of winter. The goddess was also known by the name of Ilamatecuhtli (‘a noble old woman’) and Cozcamiauh (‘a necklace of maize flowers’).

It has been suggested that the name 'Guadalupe' is actually a corruption of a Nahuatl name, 'Coatlaxopeuh', which has been translated as 'Who Crushes the Serpent'. In this interpretation, the serpent is Quetzalcoatl, one of the chief Aztec gods, whom 'the Virgin Mary' crushed by inspiring the conversion of the natives to Catholicism.[/quote]

This is NOT good.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Budge' post='1217916' date='Mar 23 2007, 06:06 PM']Did you know the Lady of Guadalupe is given the name of an Aztec goddess as well?

Really I see the marian worship in Latin America as simply different forms of pagan religions.

Remember I did the "goddess" junk while UU, aint nothing new to me!

[url="http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/guadalup.html"]VIRGIN OF GUADALUPE AND AZTEC gODDESS TOO?[/url]
This is NOT good.[/quote]
Budge, God uses what we call inculturation. He sees things that are significant to a certain culture and He uses those signs and symbols to get across His meaning. Our Lady of Guadalupe was dressed as an Aztec princess so that the Aztecs would see royalty, because Mary is royal. She was dressed with a sash of pregnancy, so that the Aztecs would understand that she had a Child. She was crushing a serpent, one of their gods, and standing on the moon, one of their gods, and blocking out the sun, one of their gods, as if to say, "these gods of yours are trampled under the feet of the Gospel," and yet, she has her head down in humility because the real message she bears is her son, who conquers all their gods. God picked this sign for a reason and designed it in such a way that it would speak to them. The very fact that she is crushing their gods should prove to you that she is not demonic. "A house divided against itself cannot stand."

[KnightofChrist]

No it is not good, you believe anything that trashes the Bride of Christ, Mother Church.

[Paladin]

[quote name='Budge' post='1217916' date='Mar 23 2007, 08:06 PM']Did you know the Lady of Guadalupe is given the name of an Aztec goddess as well?

Really I see the marian worship in Latin America as simply different forms of pagan religions.

Remember I did the "goddess" junk while UU, aint nothing new to me!

[url="http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/guadalup.html"]VIRGIN OF GUADALUPE AND AZTEC gODDESS TOO?[/url]
This is NOT good.[/quote]
"Son of God" is also a title used by Egyptian pharaohs, Roman Caesars, and Chinese dynasts.
"Lord of Hosts" was a common title for Mesopotamian and Phoenician gods, including Baal and the deity kings of Persia.
The Hebrew name "Yahweh" comes from four symbols that, individualy, make up the four classical pagan elements: earth, fire, water, air.
Cults in Egypt worshipped Osiris as a risen god and they ate a ritual meal of bread and wine.
The Greek mystery cult of Mithras believed they were saved by the blood of their slain and resurrected god.
So if we see Marian devotion as a form of paganism, by your logic, Christianity might as well be too.

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1217239' date='Mar 22 2007, 10:49 AM']On this same kind of mindset, have you ever thought that you could be worshiping your anti-catholic addiction? You seem to be mighty [b]devoted[/b], and [b]devote[/b] alot of time to it. You feed your addiction in the morning, you feed your addiction in the afternoon, and you feed your addiction at night. Wouldn't your time be better spent praying more to Christ, than posting hate against His beautiful Holy Bride all the time?[/quote]

Indeed. Every Anti-Catholic post seems to be a shrine to this idol of yours.

[quote name='Sirklawd' post='1217271' date='Mar 22 2007, 11:42 AM']im going to take this oppertunity to use some common sense. My own common sense tells me im wasting my time.

these people that do this. that kneel down and light candles and place flowers in front of crying statues, paint smears, burn marks, and various potato chips that may or may not look like a religious figure do not do so because they worship these things.

God and Jesus and everything they believe in is not suddenly replaced by a cookie sheet or a statue. These people do not pray "OH GREAT COOKIE SHEET PLEASE REMOVE MY SINS AND LET ME LIVE WITH YOU IN HEAVEN!".

This is rediculous, as is your arguement.

The people who kneel in front of these things do so because they honestly believe that it is a miracle (whether it is or not is not the point at the moment). To them these things are absolute proof of the existence of God and Jesus, and it is a direct mark. a direct work of the Lord. A a tiny footprint of the infinite lord that is in fact visible proof. These people go there and kneel not at the cookie sheet, but to see God's work.

The same exact thing happens to the man who kneels down in a field of grass and stares up at the big blue open sky to prayer and give thanks. He is not worshiping the sky. He is worshipping God, who created the sky. To some people seeing the sky is proof enough of God's existence. To others, it is the image of Mary on a cookie sheet. They do not worship a cookie sheet, they worship God who made the mircale happen.

A similar example is the man who prays before a crucifix. That man does not worship the wood and glue that composes that particular crucifix. That man does not worship even the artist who spent time carving out the model of Jesus. That man worships GOD. The crucifix is only the focus because of the memories associated with it.

you are absolutely correct in one part though. If someone somewhere is worshipping a cookie sheet instead of Jesus, clearly that person has made a tremendous mistake.[/quote]

This is really down to earth. I like it. Take heed to these words, eh?

One more thing Budge. With all due respect, don't bash Our Lady before looking into ALL the sides here! You haven't even presented any FACTS! The fact that the Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe is bowing her head and has her hands folded in prayer shows that she does not desire to be worshiped, but is worshiping God herself! If you take the time to look upon the image, read about what we know, you will find it maybe even slightly interesting. Ever considered how the cactus fibre of the tilma (which is said to last 90 years at most) has held the image for 500 years?

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1217975' date='Mar 23 2007, 08:24 PM']Indeed. Every Anti-Catholic post seems to be a shrine to this idol of yours.
This is really down to earth. I like it. Take heed to these words, eh?

One more thing Budge. With all due respect, don't bash Our Lady before looking into ALL the sides here! You haven't even presented any FACTS! The fact that the Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe is bowing her head and has her hands folded in prayer shows that she does not desire to be worshiped, but is worshiping God herself! If you take the time to look upon the image, read about what we know, you will find it maybe even slightly interesting. Ever considered how the cactus fibre of the tilma (which is said to last 90 years at most) has held the image for 500 years?[/quote]
Or perhaps more amazingly, how is it that the cactus fibers themselves are colored...not painted over, but actually of different colors, as if dyed. Nobody could die anything with that precision.

[Mr.Cat]

[b]This argument has denigrated from the use of statues, placing objects before the image, the translation of a single verse, and now to the legitimacy of the devotion itself[/b]. Christians for centuries when encountering aspects of Divine Truth in any culture would work to incorporate that truth into their education of the one true Faith. The reason why the Spanish were so influential for example was because a supposed “deity” whom reigned as their king for centuries but then left saying he would return in a hundred years to reclaim his throne.

A hundred years exactly comes the Spanish landing on their shores with the same colored skin as their “deity” with their Catholic Missionaries to bring all peoples under the throne of Christ the King. Before the hundred years were up there was a usual apparition among the local religious clerics where they saw the world in turmoil as then a woman appeared atop of the moon crowned in stars opening her arms to the people crushing a serpent’s head; which really surprised Spanish Missionaries.

If you read the [b]Apocalypse of Saint John[/b] ([i]Book of Revelation[/i]) you will find the symbols that they witnessed is reflective of the gospel message and this writing. Where the throne of Christ the King is being described which then is described the great Ark which is then described as a woman standing atop of the moon crowned with a crown of stars, this is the Blessed Virgin.

Now someone points out that Guadalupe translates to crushing snakes and this is the correct translation of the apparition. This is because in this apparition the Blessed Virgin tells the people that she is the one that would crush the head of the serpent, which is in scripture. So because of this the Missionaries when naming it they gave it this title. So the fact that there is local legend about it is totally inconsequential.

Although, if you wish to denounce apparitions then we have to denounce Saint Paul the Apostle as an apostle or as a true writer of scripture since his conversion was brought about by an apparition of the crucified Christ. Moreover, we have to discount the entire [b]Apocalypse of Saint John[/b] ([i]Book of Revelation[/i]) since if you read the first few words it writes that he is having a vision. Then we could move into the early Church Fathers that write even more about apparitions such as Our Lady of the Pillar occurring within the first hundred years or so of the Church. So to denounce apparitions as a whole one denounces scripture.

Moreover let’s look at what this apparition caused. It caused an entire people to convert to the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church which is the ground and pillar of truth, the true Church founded by our Blessed Lord. Even looking at it from a non-Catholic outlook you still have to admit that being exposed to Christian ideology is something better than being exposed to pagan ideology. In fact missionary activity in Mexico is causing social instability and the people are becoming less Christian. People are starting to few that there are so many different beliefs and because they are being told Catholics are plainly wrong, then they are starting to see their forefathers are eternally dammed. Then with the advent of a strong occultist activity in Mexico they will slowly start to adapt such into their religious beliefs. The best thing that can happen for Mexico right now are some Saints and good Bishops.

If one looks at what proofs we have of the apparition lets look to the imprinting of the actual image of Guadalupe. It was created without any known pigment type, since we can look at how a drawling was made and figure out in what manner it was created. The image is too exact since if you look into the eyes of the image you can see the people standing about in the room. There is no outline to the image so it couldn’t have been painted onto the image since artists have to make an outline in their image first. Then the remarkable fact that the actual canvas, a piece of cloth that degrades normally after a few years, has lasted a few hundred years exposed to the elements. Then you have the personal conversions and happenings just surrounding the Guadalupe Image.

If you claim the Catholic Church fabricated this in the day and age it was done, you are claiming something that is utterly impossible. For it is impossible to produce the same results even in the modern world. So very much so, the devotion is valid and a true means of approaching our Blessed Lord. It is the manner that He intended for the Blessed Virgin spoke “my soul doth magnify the Lord.”

[carrdero]

[b] Do You See Anything Wrong With This Picture?[/b]
[img]http://www.geocities.com/carrdero/600xPopupGallery.jpg[/img]

1. The little girl seems more entranced with listening to her iPod than the miracle in front of her.
2. The older woman’s desparate attempt to be charged a “child’s admission” to see this miracle is downright embarrassing.
3. The bowl of refreshments needs refilling.
4. Plants belong in the sun (not in the shade) if they are expected to grow.
5. She’s wearing pink sneakers after Labor Day.

[jeffpugh]

No comment, carrdero...

[Mr.Cat]

If this is the non-Catholic response then needless to say that the non-Catholic side concedes their case...

[Paladin]

[quote name='Mr.CatholicCat' post='1218943' date='Mar 24 2007, 09:53 PM']If this is the non-Catholic response then needless to say that the non-Catholic side concedes their case...[/quote]
Or he's not really taking Budge's side and just wants everyone to not take themselves so seriously.