 |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Several studies have, in fact, been done on this very topic. Athough there may be a placebo effect on people who are aware they are being prayed for, there is no evidence that prayer has any efficacy in scientifically-controlled studies.
The Mayo Clinic did a study in the 1990's and both Columbia University and the NIH have done prayer studies. All concluded prayer had no effect. Anecdotal evidence, of course, on the efficacy of prayer abounds.
Athos,
Thanks for that information.
I have had prayers answered so, of course, I believe in them.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
Wondergirl agrees: Perhaps the benefit is most of all to the pray-er...
Pray-ers benefitting from their own prayers is non-controversial. Just as meditation or a host of other practices can benefit an individual, so one's prayer can produce a beneficial effect on the psychological health of the pray-er. This effect HAS been scientifically proven but is attributed to alpha waves in the brain.
Athos,
Yes, that is how many scientists attribute it.
Some folks don't want to give God credit for anything good.
How sad that is.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
And yet... the research and studies have, and are, continuing... so a definitive answer has apparently not been determined...
Why give God credit for something which is proven to be purely physiological??Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Capucin,
What has been proven purely physical without God's involvement?
I have hear only opinions on that, not proof.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoulaLC
What continuing studies are you referring to?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Hate can be preached in many ways. It doesn't have to be ranting and raving; it can simply be preaching untruth. Catholics have been explaining to Protestants for five hundred years that Mary is venerated (highly respected) not adored (worshipped), yet many Protestants continue to hang onto this old canard like a dog on a bone. It is not a difficult concept to grasp.
That ministerial students repeated what they were told in seminaries is understandable, but then one is forced to ask why were the seminaries passing on an obvious untruth.
On the other hand, it is not hard to see how Protestants can become confused over the issue. Especially when the Catholic Church declares Mary to be Queen of Heaven or titles her Co-Redemptrix or calls her Mother of God. To the uninformed, these are certainly god-like appellations and the real distinction can get lost. But a word or two of explanation should suffice to dispel the misunderstanding.
cozyk - I agree, the story as you have presented it wouldn't make sense because it would seem that each of God's children could be rejected arbitrarily and condemned. However, if the story were that not every single human being is a child of God but only those whom God chooses to save, then I think the idea of God's love being conditional makes more sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by cozyk
According to the bible, anyone who rejects the teaching of Jesus Christ is not following God but is following his father, the Devil. I reference John 8:
"So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” They answered him, “We are offspring of Abraham and have never been enslaved to anyone. How is it that you say, 'You will become free'?”
Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. I know that you are offspring of Abraham; yet you seek to kill me because my word finds no place in you. I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.”
They answered him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham's children, you would be doing the works Abraham did, but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did. You are doing the works your father did.” They said to him, “We were not born of sexual immorality. We have one Father—even God.” Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. YOU ARE OF YOUR FATHER THE DEVIL, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God."
The issue in this confrontation is that these people refused to believe the words of Christ. They rejected his teaching as one come from God. Jesus rebukes them and makes a clear statement to them that even though they think they are children of God, the fact is that they are not. God is not their father... the Devil is. Primarily because in their unbelief, they sought to kill him.
The question then becomes, how does God feel about these types of people—specifically those who reject the teaching of Jesus Christ for their own? Consider John 3 which lays it out a little more specifically:
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should NOT PERISH but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever BELIEVES in him is NOT CONDEMNED, but whoever DOES NOT BELIEVE IS CONDEMNED ALREADY, because he has NOT BELIEVED in the name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God.”
Now, either the bible I read is wrong and God would never condemn anyone or my bible has it right and those who are resistant to and hostile towards the truth will be condemned because of it. Cozyk, God is love... he evidenced it by sending Jesus Christ to pay for our sins. Yes, you weren't alive when Christ died but the offer stands on the table even for you. You can continue on in your unbelief that God would ever punish someone for his sin or you can humble yourself and see that you (just like me) are an unworthy and morally perverse creature. But the good news of the gospel is that though we are morally unworthy of God, he is willing to forgive us and cleanse us of our unrighteousness... we must repent and turn from our sin and unbelief.
Then what are the words of explanation?! Queen of Heaven and Co-Redemptrix are heady titles to justify if Mary is not a god(dess) and worthy of worship.Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
Well, let's see, the title "Queen of Heaven" has been around since the Council of Ephesus, and Irenaeus had already described the view that she is co-Redemptrix. This is to say that any interested party could do a little reading on his or her own and readily discover plenty of "words of explanation". Those words shouldn't have to be delivered personally to each Protestant in order for the hyperbole to come to and end. The Catholic Church doesn't exactly keep this stuff a secret.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
That avoidance to respond to an honest inquiry is probably why the continued confusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akoue
Wondergirl,
Mary is the Mother of Christ the King (God the Son) so the bible tell us.
Being the mother of a King she is a queen and the mother of God the Son.
It is a simple as that.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
It's not avoidance. It's tired fingers: To expect a summary on an internet forum of the relevant features of Marian doctrine would be a preposterous demand. I don't know how to provide a course in Mariology in the space of an AMHD post. Maybe that's my failing; but it's not avoidance. (PM De Maria, he tends to be better at this than I.) As I say, a little initiative on anyone's part will readily yield all the "words of explanation" one wants. One can then, having done a modicum of research on one's own initiative, come to an informed opinion about the relevant doctrines of the Catholic Church. But to sling around terms like "Mariolatry", in preference to doing some work to inform oneself first, is not intellectually honest. By all means, make the case that Mary shouldn't be venerated. That's perfectly reasonable. But to assert that Catholics and Orthodox worship Mary is to show that one hasn't done that work first.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Actually, it's a lot more than that, especially the co-Redemptrix part. (I've spent the last fifteen minutes reading Catholic-approved and sponsored information on the Internet.)Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
There you go! It's not hard to find.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Wondergirl.
To me it IS as simple as that.
Thanks.
Fred
Yeah, now I'm sorry I looked it up. What I've read supports Mary's vaulted status and makes it look like worshipping her is the obvious reaction to her position.
Wow, all that after a whole fifteen minutes!Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Let me see. I was faulted for not looking it up, and, when I did, I was faulted for not reading enough. I guess I need a Catholic in my life after all to personally explain it to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akoue
I'm sorry this is turning into an argument. I thought I was providing a good explanation, but I see now I didn't explain enough; rather I made a claim about Catholic belief. That claim happens to be correct but, as Akoue said, it's not easy to put all the history into a post here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Some Catholics have a special devotion to Mary, but even these NEVER say she is a goddess. Does she APPEAR to be a goddess, or at least a demi-goddess, to those outside of Catholicism? Frankly, sometimes yes. But the truth of the matter is that, in fact and belief, she is NOT. I would think the testimony of Catholics themselves would be enough to put the matter to rest. Or a genuine attempt to research the issue to find the official explanations of these things.
When, in the face of denial and/or research, non-Catholics continue to insist that Catholics worship Mary, I cannot help but think an agenda is at work here - an agenda to disparage Catholic belief. Although relegated these days pretty much to the fundamentalist wing of Protestantism, it's still out there - a hangover from the Reformation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
It's not your explanation Athos; WonderGirl has heard this more than once before – from me. That’s why she’s swinging so hard. Once before, I think she said, a virgin birth is believable, but it’s beyond God’s capacity for Mary to have an immaculate birth.
WonderGirl, did I get that right?
JoeT
Athos and Joe,
Well said.
Well done.
Fred
Luther liked Mary A LOT!Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
He even praised the veneration of Mary. But Luther was not the whole of the Reformation, as you know. The heart of the Reformation campaign against Catholic doctrine regarding Mary was in England (which had long had a very strong Marian tradition).Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Akoue,
'Yes that is true,
The Protestants started a big attack on Mary that has lasted to this day.
I wonder how her son liked that.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
No, you didn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
I have always believed Jesus' birth was pure and sinless, immaculate. I do not agree that Mary "had to be" immaculate. I had told you back then that that belief diminishes God's power. It always seemed to me that one of the major points of the Christmas story was that God honored a lowly, sinful, human virgin as the mother of His Son. What a wonderful example of God's desire to reach out to each of us in our own humanity!
And then I wondered why would the immaculateness stop with Mary. Why wasn't her mother immaculate--and her mother--and her mother... all the way back to Eve?
Wondergirl
Mary HAD to be immaculate so that original sin did not pass on the he Son in any way.
God's power made her to be that way so there was no diminishing of God's power except in the minds of some people.
With God ALL THINGS are possible.
And He chose to have His Son born perfect of Mary, a human being.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
It explains that they rejected Him, not He rejecting them.Quote:
Originally Posted by cozyk
Not according to Catholic doctrine. The Scripture says:Quote:
Imagine a person that has led an exemplary nearly flawless life. Did all the right things because that's just who he is. The only thing is, he is jewish. Now, because he does not believe Jesus is the messiah, he is going to hell. That's what you are saying to me.
Exodus 20:6
And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
Keeping God's commandments is how we love God. And a Jew who keeps God's commandments will be shown mercy though he reject Jesus:
Matthew 12: 31Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
32And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.
848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338
Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 1 SECTION 2 CHAPTER 3 ARTICLE 9 PARAGRAPH 3
Ok.Quote:
Answer the hard questions people and stop talking about just the pretty parts.
Not exactly. Have you ever read about the Prodigal Son? If you study that parable, you will see that the son voluntarily the Father's house. And when he returned, he was welcomed.Quote:
Another example - you have given your child a choice to follow your rules or not. IF they do, then you welcome them home. (Heaven) If they don't, you will not allow them into your home.
That goes to the above. No one is sent to hell, They voluntarily go there:Quote:
In fact, not only can you not come home but I am going to send you to an awful place where you will be tortured and burned forever. Remember I still love you though.
CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 1037
7 God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic
URL: CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 1037
I don't think its an ugly truth. I'm amazed at the beauty and justice of it. God doesn't force our wills.Quote:
Face it, this is the ugly truth you keep avoiding.
It is you who don't want to face the hard truths. Its usually the child who gives the ultimatum. How many times do parents plead with a child to remain at home, but the child runs away and is lost to drugs, crime or worse?Quote:
Would any of you present this ultimatum to your child? Unless you tell me no, I will just have to assume that you would.
I know people with children on drugs whom they can't permit back in their home because they will rob them blind or because they are afraid of them. I know people who have been run off because they've left their loved ones in crack houses.
So, face up to the ugly facts. When people turn and do evil, and they won't listen to reason, even though you love them, will you let them back in your home?
But God does let them back in, if they repent. But if they don't, then it is they who have turned from Him.
Because God doesn't break faith with us. It is the sinner who breaks faith with God.Quote:
You don't have a problem with God doing it. Everything you describe is black or white. There is no grey area.
Sincerely,
So Anne, her mother, also had to be immaculate so that original sin did not pass on to Mary in any way.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
No one--Jew, atheist, Christian, Buddhist, African pigmy, Aleut--can keep God's commandments.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. Romans 3:23
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one. Romans 3:10
Jesus Himself said:Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Matthew 5:48
Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
I don't think He would have said that if it couldn't be done.
And St. Paul seems to think that some have not sinned:
Romans 5:14
Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
Non sequitur. God caused St. Mary be born without sin. Not St. Anne.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
From the fact that Scripture says that all have sinned it doesn't follow that all had (or have) to sin. The two claims are in different modalities. So De Maria is quite right to say that the passages adduced by Wondergirl do not demonstrate the *impossibility* of sinlessness.
God caused Jesus to be born without sin, so why Mary too?Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
Some humans have lived sinless lives?Quote:
Originally Posted by Akoue
Since Scripture says that death is the wage of sin, we have also the evidence that Enoch and Elijah never physically died. They were carried into heaven.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akoue
Jesus is God.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Enoch, Elijah, children who die in the womb, children who die before the age of reason. Even adults who never achieve the age of reason before they die.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:48 PM. |