Do You See Anything Wrong With This Picture?

[Megz]

I'd probably feel called to pray myself, feeling humbled by God for not seeing Him in everyday things as this accidental baking pan shows.

I don't think its really about falling in love with an image, but being drawn to God in sheer wonderment of the accidents which remind us of Him. One of those "stop and think" or "take the blinders off the horse" moments

[mariahLVzJP2]

[quote name='Sirklawd' post='1217271' date='Mar 22 2007, 10:42 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]

i agree with you, good point!

[Mateo el Feo]

Speaking of "crazy things" like cookie sheets, this might be the right time to mention that many non-Christians think that it is crazy for Christians to believe that God became Incarnate as a poor first-century Jew, and that this Man's ignoble death on the Cross could free all humanity from sin.[quote name='1 Cor 1:24']...we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles.[/quote]Crazy...probably even more so than seeing a likeness of Mary in a cookie sheet. But I am crazy enough to believe in Jesus, and "proclaim Christ crucified."

[Paladin]

[quote name='Budge' post='1217212' date='Mar 22 2007, 09:32 AM']I think[b] ignorance[/b] is what would lead someone to kneel in front of a cookie sheet with a stain on it.

[b]Who cares what is inside their heart? The heart is a deceitful thing[/b], they have been fooled.[/quote]
"When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus" (Romans 2:14-16)

St. Paul was such a silly Catholic.

(Though for the record, I'm not one to believe in "stain apparitions" of Mary or anyone else that seem to have cropped up in the last few years. Usually when Our Lady has something to say, she [url="http://www.olrl.org/stories/lourdes.shtml"]makes[/url] [url="http://st-takla.org/Multimedia/07-Videos/09-Videos-Videohat-07-Virgin-Mary-Videos_Videohat-El-3athraa2-Mariam.html"]a big[/url] [url="http://www.theotokos.org.uk/pages/approved/appariti/fatima.html#anchor133742"]deal[/url] about it.)

Edited March 22, 2007 by Paladin

[Budge]

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. That is a bit different then an Native person who has never seen a Bible or heard about Christ kneeling before her "totem" who simply does NOT KNOW better.
[quote]Gen. 19:1
"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."
[url="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/01019.htm"]http://www.drbo.org/chapter/01019.htm[/url]
Moreover the Blessed Virgin being the Mother of God and the Mother of Man, she is indeed our Mother. The Commandments of God mention that we are commanded to obey and honor our Mother. Later in the Scriptures we see that all whom do not honor their mothers are cursed. As Lot as I posted previously fell prostrate to the Angels and they did not correct them, there is a difference in veneration that is given to the Blessed Virgin (hyperdulia) and the rest of the Angels and Saints (dulia). But there is “worship” (latria) that is offered to Almighty God alone.[/quote]

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]
Gen 19:2 And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.

[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.