but to bury him.

My problem: I am not afraid to respond to any question or challenge by a multiple of posters. I, like most humans, am faced with crises of various degrees, be it work, family or otherwise. My time is becoming more and more limited.

My concern: There must be over 2000 posters across the Slate boards who are regular contributors, and yet, here on Faith Based there are no more than a handful of Christians, the rest being skeptics. Translation: This world is hurting and in peril; even so-called Christians do not seem to take their faith seriously, they would rather spend all their free time immersed in entertainment or massaging their egos. Like Jesus said: “When I return will there be any faith left on earth at all?”

So if you don’t hear from me it is not because for lack of want. I posted an I suppose oh-so-slightly mean spirited response to this Sharperchef poster who we never heard from hence. <link>

But to those who responded to my post, I offer a brief response. Too bad there is not another Catholic on Slate who might help out. Enjoy your day all you denizens of the here and now.

==============================­==============

JGC: >>Put a duck in front of me and I'll readily agree it's a duck.

Sorry, I beg to differ, sincerely. But maybe you and I need to get off this merry-go-round.

JGC:>>The problem is you keep pointing to unepxlained lights on top of a buildings, and when I agree "Yep, that's an unexplained light on top of that building" you insist "No it's not! It's a miraculous incarnation of the Virgin Mary!" Standard question re: the Zeitun event: how was the light positively identified as being a representation of the virgin Mary, rather than Mary Magdelene, or Sarah, or Rebecca? Or Joseph of Arimethea in drag, for that matter?

Oh, it is quite clearly far more incredulous and detailed than “unexplained lights,” not that your “standard answer” any longer suprises me. JGC, I do not believe you believe in the Jewish God you purport to do so. You give him credit for nothing, zero manifestations or influence in this world --- not even for being the architect of evolution. In fact, you rail against Him and his message for the world. That is my opinion, Ok?, not fact. But strongly held nonetheless. Right, it’s Mary Magdelene. Just ignore all other unexplained manifestations of Mary, just ignore the fact that God is here to assist not confuse, just ignore the fact 500,000 Egyptians who saw her say it was the Virgin Mary based on all other images and historical evidence of her, not to mention the logic of it being her, ---- and then we are left with it could be any old lady. And worst of all --- no matter who it is on that cathedral, you ignore it and its message, you only try to disprove it, but you will not let it move your soul or prick your conscience.

==============================­========

Reptilicus: JV-12, curious on your definition of "proof of God"...

Equally curious what your definition is? And what JGC’s definition is? My definition: When 3 young children no older than nine tell a thousand people present that the Virgin Mary told them there will be a miracle on October 13 (three months in the future) for all the people present to see so they will know these messages are from God --- and then --- that great, unbelievable miracle occurs exactly on that day as foretold shocking the world --- that is my definition of proof of God.

again, if God is PROVED (by the dictionary defintion of that word), then what is there to have FAITH in?

Faith in heaven, hell, purgatory, eternal life, and God’s constant companionship and aid in our daily trials and sufferings. It is not a blind faith, we have some evidence of God, but there is still a great deal to hold on to in belief of God’s words and promises for other matters and our eternal futures. It is clear that humanity is weak and needs constant reminders of God’s presence. The Jews were horrible sinners and believers, and they paid dearly as a result despite the manifestations from Yahweh.

==============================­===================

Havelock:

JV-12: You and others [who disagree with me] are too stupid, narcissistic, lazy, or apathetic to see the obvious.”

Yeah, we get it already. Really, you could save yourself a lot of time by simply stating your opinion on the subject at hand and then typing the above. No muss, no fuss.

My opinion was specific to those (like yourself?) who readily buy into evolution but then mock or deny any evidence for Intelligent Design. They will quickly admit if they see a painting they know there had to be a painter without observing it constructed, but they rail against a designer or Supreme Intelligence in bringing the enormous complexity of evolution about. I find that position to be insane, obstinate, pride-filled, and all those other adjectives I used above. Like I said, the devil can fool humanity so easily to the point it must humor him.

==============================­=========================

Silent Observer: If this happened to me, I'd be tempted to break the statue open and look for a hollow inside.

Final answer? Seems to me you have an obligation to say more. And what if the statue in your grandmother’s bedroom weeping tears of blood in your presence was not hollow inside or had no gadgets installed? What then? Run away and try to forget what transpired?

If it insults you to call scores of weeping/bleeding statuary fake, then you've set yourself up for it. There are some hoaxes out there. Here, I have some examples. Does it insult you to see these examples, JV-12? Then so be it. The truth insults you. That's fitting.

It insults me not in the least. I know there are hoaxes out there, but it seems rather apparent to me that most are not. At least, plenty enough that have been observed by thousands and those under investigations have no natural explanation. That does nothing for you? Witnesses mean nothing to you, why? Because you demand from God that it be done in front of your eyes only. Because you do not want to believe sensible and, really, undeniable manifestations of proof of the divine. The very proof the obstinate demand before they will believe.

==============================­=========================

Sore Loser: Does anyone believe that JV-12 will abandon the RCC and become an adherent of the Coptic Orthodox Church? After all, it was a Coptic Orthodox Church in Zeitoun where the BMM made her appearance. Doesn't that show that Mary favors the Coptic Orthodox brand of Catholism over the Roman version?

This particular Coptic Orthodox faith may very well not be in union with Rome, although a number of other eastern orthodox faiths are. And orthodox faiths such as these greatly revere and honor Mary as much as Catholics. And what of it? They are still Christian and miracles occur in many, if not most, Christian faiths --- I do not deny what many Protestants report. God is not only in interested in Catholics --- consider the fact there were maybe 500,000 Muslims who were given this vision of Mary on the cathedral and maybe only 40,000 Christians. Clearly, the message was for non-Christians more than anyone else.

==============================­========================

---continued in subsequent post ----

Anxiousmofo: I know what you mean, JV.

I told a bunch of philosophers why I thought their so-called "philosophy" (which isn't love of wisdom, believe you me!!!) was stupid, and when they told me that I didn't actually understand their position, in their attempts at "clarification" they used a bunch of 50 cent words which were basically meaningless! What a joke! And a nauseating joke, too!

It's so much easier to just call areas I'm not an expert in a bunch of hooey than it is to even entertain the idea that maybe I need to understand what it is I'm debunking before I go debunking it.

If you can't explain it in single syllable words and short sentences, it's not worth understanding! (You know, the Catholic Encyclopedia needs to learn that lesson, too - what a bunch of eggheads!!!)

My main point remains. And it was not that the language was so heady, causing one to refer to the dictionary constantly, that it was a diversion. It was the simple fact that natural selection is a crutch and poorly explained or proven. Sometimes we get it more simply. Natural Selection: “Process by which the genotypes in a population that are best adapted to the environment increase in frequency relative to less well-adapted genotypes over a number of generations.” Which tells me nothing. Oh, so this is how the animal decided it was time to start working on a spleen? Or a wing? Or a brain? It’s “environment” (another poorly defined term) caused this unbelievable project to commence and come to a beautiful result? Sorry, anxious, that is a joke, a sorry joke, without admitting God or a supreme intelligence was the designer and power behind it, not this nebulous cop out called natural selection.

As far as Catholic teaching goes --- far more times than not, it is not confusing sublime language that gets unbelievers hung up. It is the simple message they are repulsed by or are so quick to ignore or come up with crazy ideas of their own to suggest its untruthfulness.

==============================­================

.

Not sure I will be around to take my medicine from my secular, humanist oppressors, but the primary reason for my responding now is this. There are so few so-called Christians who take their faith seriously enough to look deeply into it and to witness to the world. They are lukewarm and their penalty will be great, if not eternal. I, like St. Paul, work through my salvation “in fear and trembling.” I wish I had more time to answer the call and answer the challenge. But where are the faithful out there? I see almost no one. This nation is in great peril and impending judgment. IN MY OPINION.

You keep insisting that these manifestations and "miracles" are proof positive that your god exists, but, in the past when others have posted similar events relating to non Christian religions you proclaim them to be false and have yet to show us why yours and only yours are true. You come to this board with the obvious bias that only what you believe is true and that we are all wrong for not taking your word for it. You speak of any who does not buy into ID as mocking it while mocking evolution which has a considerable amount of empirical evidence supporting it while ID seems to do little more than say "god (presumably the Christian god) did it so evolution is wrong". Perhaps, if you had an actual arguement that does not come across as "I'm right so you have to be wrong but you are too stupid to see that nyah, nyah" we might be just a bit more receptive.

So why didn't I see this "miracle"? Surely, god (if he really did care about straightening out humanity) would have shown this miracle to me and all the other non-believers in the world. Why would it be more believable to show it to Coptic Christians and Muslims in Egypt then to show it to, say, Austin, Texas (or Paris or London or Amsterdam)? Or maybe the people that put on the light show couldn't get a proper stage in Texas (or Europe)?

And don't give me that "free will" bull. Free will only means something if the information to base a decision on is available and believable.

JGC:>>The problem is you keep pointing to unepxlained lights on top of a buildings, and when I agree "Yep, that's an unexplained light on top of that building" you insist "No it's not! It's a miraculous incarnation of the Virgin Mary!" Standard question re: the Zeitun event: how was the light positively identified as being a representation of the virgin Mary, rather than Mary Magdelene,

The point is, everyone sees what they see. Nothing is ever eye to eye. The best thing we can all do is accept that we can't change what others see & agree to let each of us see it our own way.

I do not agree with what you claim of me.

Hindu glass cows exuding milk. I believe it, and I believe it is supernatural. Another one drinking milk. I believe it to be supernatural.

Other supernatural manifestations from the Islam or Buddhist faiths. I believe them that they are supernatural. I am not looking for crazy improbable “natural” answers to try to explain them away..

I am of strong belief most of these “hard-to-explain-away” well documented manifestations of any faith, or no faith, are either of God or are diabolic. I will not offer an opinion on most if they are diabolic or not, such as those in the Hindu faith. Actually, I will. I am guessing they are godly directing the believers towards some virtue.

But to your main question. I do not believe the Christian faith is the true faith because of the miracles I have put forth. I believe that is but one important ingredient. So much more is necessary to validate which faith is the true faith. The magnanimous degree of the manifestation carries weight. Even more so does the very detailed message and the fruits of the event. Beyond miracles, is what else does the faith claim and have to offer? The historical record. The charity of the faith. The incomparable saints. So and so on. Far more is required, agreed. I just cannot go into all that right now, but that is actually the greater reason why I accept Christianity as the fullest and most truthful of God’s message. The miracles assist in validating it for me, not in demonstrating it.

.

Sidenote: If there ever were any so-called UFO appartions that really took place and were seen by humans --- those I believe to be demonic apparitions in order to deceive those more readily open to decption. Demonic apparitions and activity are well-documented in history, just ask an exorcist.

SoreLoser:

So why didn't I see this "miracle"? Surely, god (if he really did care about straightening out humanity) would have shown this miracle to me and all the other non-believers in the world. Why would it be more believable to show it to Coptic Christians and Muslims in Egypt then to show it to, say, Austin, Texas (or Paris or London or Amsterdam)? Or maybe the people that put on the light show couldn't get a proper stage in Texas (or Europe)?

And don't give me that "free will" bull. Free will only means something if the information to base a decision on is available and believable.

I know you are repelled by Scripture but it is my short answer. Jesus: "An evil age is eager for a sign, but no sign will be given it except that of Jonah."

Translation: You are not worthy of a sign.

Translation #2.: God has given you enough, He is not required to answer to your demands.

"Not sure I will be around to take my medicine from my secular, humanist oppressors, but the primary reason for my responding now is this. There are so few so-called Christians who take their faith seriously enough to look deeply into it and to witness to the world. They are lukewarm and their penalty will be great, if not eternal. I, like St. Paul, work through my salvation “in fear and trembling.” I wish I had more time to answer the call and answer the challenge. But where are the faithful out there? I see almost no one. This nation is in great peril and impending judgment. IN MY OPINION. "

I agree JV. The good thing is that they are a small but vocal minority of US citizens. Like you I've wasted enough time here. They have been given the knowledge of Christ and have rejected it out of hand and we know that not all are people will accept JESUS or see our Father in HIS Glory.

And the gospel says (paraphrasing) “If you see a man steeped in sin and going down the road of perdition and do nothing to admonish him or assist him, that man may surely die or be greatly punished for his error. But, you too, will be greatly punished for your lack of concern or action.”

In other words, as a Christian we are mandated to share the good news to all corners of the earth. It is not a choice, it is a command with consequences.

It is not that I avoid responding to you, it is that I have too much on my plate responding to all the critics out there.

A brief comment: Your theology and mine have great differences, agreed? As do our approaches. Yet, I do not feel I need to come to your aid, or vice versa. We both may be wrong on some of the doctrines or peripherals and doing more harm than good. But I will not deny your belief in Christ which is paramount. Nor do I believe God is condemning us for trying to do what we think is right in witnessing, even if it is not always correct. (Rev. 3:15-16)

Doggiedevil, now he is another story. Where does he find all that bile in Scripture? :)

JV-12:

And the gospel says (paraphrasing) “If you see a man steeped in sin and going down the road of perdition and do nothing to admonish him or assist him, that man may surely die or be greatly punished for his error. But, you too, will be greatly punished for your lack of concern or action.”

In other words, as a Christian we are mandated to share the good news to all corners of the earth. It is not a choice, it is a command with consequences.

Agreed and that has been done here.

JV-12:

I do not agree with what you claim of me.

Hindu glass cows exuding milk. I believe it, and I believe it is supernatural. Another one drinking milk. I believe it to be supernatural.

Other supernatural manifestations from the Islam or Buddhist faiths. I believe them that they are supernatural. I am not looking for crazy improbable “natural” answers to try to explain them away..

I am of strong belief most of these “hard-to-explain-away” well documented manifestations of any faith, or no faith, are either of God or are diabolic. I will not offer an opinion on most if they are diabolic or not, such as those in the Hindu faith. Actually, I will. I am guessing they are godly directing the believers towards some virtue.

But to your main question. I do not believe the Christian faith is the true faith because of the miracles I have put forth. I believe that is but one important ingredient. So much more is necessary to validate which faith is the true faith. The magnanimous degree of the manifestation carries weight. Even more so does the very detailed message and the fruits of the event. Beyond miracles, is what else does the faith claim and have to offer? The historical record. The charity of the faith. The incomparable saints. So and so on. Far more is required, agreed. I just cannot go into all that right now, but that is actually the greater reason why I accept Christianity as the fullest and most truthful of God’s message. The miracles assist in validating it for me, not in demonstrating it.

.

Sidenote: If there ever were any so-called UFO appartions that really took place and were seen by humans --- those I believe to be demonic apparitions in order to deceive those more readily open to decption. Demonic apparitions and activity are well-documented in history, just ask an exorcist.

I recall once when these other occurrences were pointed out you stated that they were all demonic in nature that is what I meant when I stated that you declared them to be false. You demand that we take unproven occurrences from your faith as fact and unequivocal proof of the existance of your god and declare any from other faiths to be false or demonic. What proof (other than your exalcted word) do we have that yours is true and others are not?

So Nano

I would be interested to hear your opinion on the various Marionite apparitions that JV cites. You know, the bleeding statues, dancing lights, Mary's face in the french toast etc.

Real? Fake? Satanic? Hallucinogens?

Silent Observer: If this happened to me, I'd be tempted to break the statue open and look for a hollow inside.

Final answer? Seems to me you have an obligation to say more. And what if the statue in your grandmother’s bedroom weeping tears of blood in your presence was not hollow inside or had no gadgets installed? What then? Run away and try to forget what transpired?

Ironic choice of words, given your answer to the fossil record, study of evolutionary biology, genetics, etc.

Assuming a statue had no obvious hollow for insertion of liquid (could have it x-rayed, I suppose), we could investigate the liquid itself to see what it was made of, and why it might be there. Many of these liquids end up being something other than blood or other things mixed with blood (like animal fat or oil) so that it doesn't dry out. Failing that, we can investigate the blood itself and look for likely donors. As some of the hoax reports have shown, the likely culprits often are the first 'witnesses.' We can also clean it off and put the statue under observation to see if it happens again. Judging from Joe Nickell's reports, the statues he's been given have thus far failed to weep or bleed for him.

It may end there, and no, I don't forget the things that happened to me. I process them as best I can. My own personal experiences, for example, would take me in a completely different direction -- not atheism, not xianity -- were I to take them at face value. If personal experience really is most valuable, what do you think I should do?

If it insults you to call scores of weeping/bleeding statuary fake, then you've set yourself up for it. There are some hoaxes out there. Here, I have some examples. Does it insult you to see these examples, JV-12? Then so be it. The truth insults you. That's fitting.

It insults me not in the least. I know there are hoaxes out there, but it seems rather apparent to me that most are not. At least, plenty enough that have been observed by thousands and those under investigations have no natural explanation. That does nothing for you? Witnesses mean nothing to you, why? Because you demand from God that it be done in front of your eyes only. Because you do not want to believe sensible and, really, undeniable manifestations of proof of the divine. The very proof the obstinate demand before they will believe.

Once again, I will have to ask you to show your math. As you do with boring regularity, you make up this argument that mathematics and/or probability is on your side without explaining it. Of course it's apparent to you that 'most' are not hoaxes. How else could you justify this belief to yourself?

To debunk your latest strawman: I distrust witnesses when they may be biased. I distrust investigations that are controlled and/or limited by biased people. Most of all I do not want a god to perform just for me. That makes it easy to dismiss. That is the essence of the problem; your god performs for the few, in secret, sneaking about as if the light of day would dispel him like fog before the dawn.

I've laid out the properties of what I think a compelling miracle would be: that it be shared by all; be recordable to facilitate investigation; be repeatable, rather than these one-off isolated events in history that we can't investigate effectively; and have a clear message, unlike your average weeping statue.

I hold to the example of doubting Thomas. According to the story, he got to meet Jesus, work with the man, watch him die, and met up again with him later, even got to stick his hands in the wounds. Now that's obstinate.

What do I get? Some weeping statue. Or some century-old solar event that ought to have been witnessed by everyone on that side of the globe, but wasn't.

People post here for a lot of reasons. Many do it simply for sport, for a bit of diversion. Some are pleasant and kind; some are mean spirited and abusive. I tend to have much more respect for people who try to use this place for something more than having a little fun at other people’s expense. And it’s pretty plain to me that you, JV-12, are serious about what you post. I respect that. I also believe you when you say you’re genuinely concerned about the fates of those you believe to be misguided. I respect that too. And yet… Our best intentions may be undone by our weaknesses, eh?

Now then, suppose I’m a Christian missionary who’s determined to try to convert a village of Hindus. My motives are noble: I honestly believe they are deluded and bound for perdition. I care for them and want to help them. Suppose further that I attempt to make them realize their folly by telling them that everyone with eyes to see knows that Hinduism is about worshipping cows, performing human sacrifice by lowering unwilling victims in an iron cage into a lava pit, and enslaving innocent children to search for lost magic stones in dangerous mines. And imagine that when they try to explain to me that I don’t really understand what Hinduism actually teaches, I tell them that their desperate efforts to justify their corrupt lust for cows, death rituals involving molten rock, and magic glowing stones ring hollow in my ears.

How many of these poor, benighted souls do you think I’d be likely to save with those tactics? Not many, I’d wager. For the most part I think I’d be undermining my best intentions simply because for whatever reason I’d have failed to get past my own ignorance and misconceptions.

And that would be pitiable indeed.