Apparitions of the Virgin Mary

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
Most of Roman theology comes from man-made tradition, not from inspired scripture!

You are just plain wrong and ignorant.

But in one point you are correct. Catholic doctrine does not come from scripture. It comes from Jesus Christ who taught before any (NT) scripture was written and several hundred years before (NT) scripture was canonised.

It was Protestants who started the unbiblical practice of inventing their theology from their cut down version of scripture.
That is why there are 40,000 protestants denominations, sects, cults and one pastor churches teaching different doctrines all supposedly from scripture.
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
Did Rome change any theology from Trent? When it denied the Pauline Justification and stayed teaching false Gospel?
Another exhibition of ignorance.

The Catholic church does not teach a false Gospel.
 

kcnalp

Well-Known Member
Apr 5, 2020
7,326
1,782
113
Indianapolis
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Apparitions of the Virgin Mary
OP ^

How does a person determine what they are seeing is Mary?
They cannot!

2 Corinthians 11 Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. 15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.
 

ChristisGod

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2020
6,911
3,864
113
64
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You are just plain wrong and ignorant.

But in one point you are correct. Catholic doctrine does not come from scripture. It comes from Jesus Christ who taught before any (NT) scripture was written and several hundred years before (NT) scripture was canonised.
Give us an example from Scripture to make your point. Its easy to declare something but its entirely different proving it from Scripture.
 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,195
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
First of all, it’s wrong to say that no one can comment on a thing without firsthand experience. That’s like the pro-aborts saying that men can’t talk about abortion because they are not women. It’s a fallacy.

I agree that there can be undue skepticism (and in this case, quite a bit, I think), but on the other hand (as has been pointed out above several times), no Catholic is required to believe in any Marian apparition, no matter how firmly established. It’s a private revelation. So no one ought to get unduly dogmatic about it.

What one can say with high assurance is that a Catholic who doubts even apparitions like Lourdes and Fatima is surely in a tiny minority of orthodox Catholics, and will therefore be somewhat likely to doubt other things that he mustn’t doubt as a Catholic.

There are anti-supernaturalist biases, modernist biases, trying to be “relevant” in the eyes of secularist friends (by downplaying so-called “medieval” things in the faith, etc.), an overly skeptical bent, etc. Lots of things play into it.

On the other end of the scale, there are people who go nuts seeing “visions” in a wall stain or the cheese on their Big Mac. This gives the faith a bad name because folks think that is nuts and wacko. Balance, moderation, common sense, and the following of Church guidelines and words of wisdom are needed. Human beings have a tendency to go to extremes.
Marian Apparitions & Public vs. Private Revelation
 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,195
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
By analogy, biblical accounts of “appearances” of those who have died, are of the same essential nature as a Marian apparition. Angels (i.e., also creatures like men) might also be included in such a survey, but stories of angels are relatively well-known, and for the sake of closer analogy and brevity, I have selected only passages with men or the appearance of men. Several of these passages involve foretelling of the future, in a manner not unlike that of the apparitions at Fatima in 1917. And several actual historical figures are named as appearing after death (Samuel, Onias, Jeremiah, Moses, and Elijah).
1 Samuel 28:12-15
Ezekiel 40:3-4
Daniel 8:15-19

Daniel 10:4-21
Sirach 46:19-20
2 Maccabees 5:1-4
2 Maccabees 10:29-30
2 Maccabees 15:11-16
Matthew 17:1-4
Matthew 27:51-53
Acts 16:9
Revelation 4:4
Revelation 6:9-10
Is there any biblical data that can be brought forth in favor of reputed Catholic Marian apparitions? Yes.
Biblical Evidence for Marian Apparitions
 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,195
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Two commenters wrote the following:

Geert ter Horst: “I’m sorry, but with my best intentions I can see nothing prefigurative of the Marian appearances in the biblical passages quoted above, let alone evidence for them.”​
*
Will: “[The article] does not provide evidence for Marian apparitions. Perhaps that is why Catholics are not required to believe them.”​

This paper is an analogical argument, and/or one from plausibility, as clearly explained in the piece: “By analogy, biblical accounts of ‘appearances’ or visions or dreams of those who have died, are of the same essential nature as a Marian apparition. . . . Several of these passages involve foretelling of the future, in a manner not unlike that of the apparitions at Fatima in 1917.”

Both forms of argument are quite often misunderstood, as I know from having to explain them countless times in the course of my (now 36 years of) apologetics. Hence, Geert and Will don’t see this as any sort of evidence at all, because they don’t seem to grasp the very nature of the analogical argument. Geert doesn’t even see anything in the examples that is “prefigurative”: which I find astounding. See the Wikipedia article on analogical arguments, and also the one on “Plausible Reasoning”.
The definition for “Evidence” at Dictionary.com is:
1. that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof.

2. something that makes plain or clear; an indication or sign.

We use analogies in theology all the time, such as, for example, regarding the Holy Trinity. C. S. Lewis defended the Trinity (I think it was in Mere Christianity) by using the analogy of a cube: one object that had three dimensions (three dimensions yet still one shape), as opposed to a square: one shape with two dimensions, or a line: one shape in one dimension (which is how — by analogy — we are compared to the Trinity: one person for one being rather than three). He compared the incarnation of Christ to a man becoming an ant.

The Bible has lots of analogies. Jesus’ parables are examples of analogies to moral and theological principles, drawn out through the use of storytelling. Jesus talked in His Sermon on the Mount about birds being provided for, so why should we worry about whether God will provide for us? He compared the Pharisees who opposed Him to “whited sepulchres, full of dead men’s bones.” It’s all use of analogy.

analogy
[əˈnaləjē]
NOUN
  1. a comparison between two things, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification.

So in the paper above I was drawing analogies of events recorded favorably in the Bible, that are of the same nature as a Marian apparition: appearances or visions of creatures appearing after they have departed this earth. In other words, the Marian apparition is shown to be in complete harmony with Holy Scripture, even though not explicitly mentioned in it. Many people seem to demand or require explicit, ultra-specific proof of everything in theology, even though the Bible itself never states that this is what is required to believe in anything.
Analogical Reasoning, and Reasoning from Plausibility
 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,195
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Brief Exchange on the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima = face book

"VicqRuiz" (VR)describes himself as "on the boundary between agnosticism and deism. I find that I am unable to accept either materialist scientism or the idea of a personal God."
This exchange is from my blog.

VR: Atheists and agnostics usually mean [by "evidence"] "something that leaves a trace in the physical record".
Apologists can mean this, but often they mean "something that would be accepted under legal rules of evidence". This usually amounts to eyewitness testimony.
A good example would be the supposed 1917 miracle at Fatima. A Catholic apologist may unhesitatingly say that there is sufficient eyewitness testimony to make the case that the sun actually stopped and moved erratically in the sky. A skeptic would ask why, if the sun moved, was it not seen throughout the hemisphere (much less why the orbits of the earth and other planets were not impacted).
Personally, I am willing to accept the possible reality of intangible and supernatural things. However, if the supernatural reaches into 3-D space and time and touches something, it should leave a footprint that can be analyzed.


DA: That miracle need not necessarily have been "astronomical." God could also have changed the perception of those who saw it. Either one is something other than natural.

VR: I agree that is a possibility. However, it leaves the several hundred millions (half of the world population ca. 1917) who were not on that hillside in Portugal with the choice of trusting what those several thousand say they saw, or trusting the evidence of their own eyes.

DA: Generally, if several thousand people say they saw the same thing, we trust them. We trust even one credible witness in court cases. If there are three witnesses saying the same thing, the case is stronger. Thousands? All the more . . .
There are many things that lots of people see, but can't yet explain. For example, UFOs. The very name is "unidentified." One need not have any opinion at all on that topic (I myself am agnostic) to recognize that there have been many unexplained sightings.

VR: That's an argument which I have seen made by a number of apologists, and in fact I discussed it earlier this year with another Catholic apologist (who also happened to be an attorney) on his own blog.
What I am wondering is that if eyewitness testimony of the supernatural is of a quality as to be acceptable in court, whether there is any precedent in American or British courts of such testimony being ruled acceptable.
In other words, if someone claimed that the circumstances of a crime or a tort was influenced by supernatural factors, was that testimony made available to the jury and was it decisive.
So far I am unaware of any such case.

DA: I have no idea. But that's beside my more fundamental point of noting how we (legally, and I think generally) are favorable towards eyewitness testimony (as long as such witnesses are credible).
And my analogy to UFOs also remains intact: we can trust the accounts of people (otherwise credible), of seeing things or events that they themselves can't explain or interpret. The validity of their testimony doesn't require them to have an opinion on a "weird" thing that they saw; only evidence that they did indeed see it. Hence, doctors, when they run across a purported miracle, will simply say "science in its present state cannot explain this phenomenon" or some such.
Thus, the eyewitness testimony of the "miracle of the sun" at Fatima doesn't necessarily (logically) depend on their belief in the apparitions or what Mary was purported to have said. It is valid apart from that (though certainly most people there would have believed it in its "religious" context; according to that prior framework).
VR: Fair enough. We may have to agree to disagree on this one.
DA: No thoughts on my analogies?
Dave Armstrong
 

ChristisGod

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2020
6,911
3,864
113
64
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You deny Pauline Justification, hence another Gospel
yes a false gospel of works, penance, purgatory - the more money you give the greater the sins forgiven. What a sham its the money changers all over again when Jesus turned over their tables in the Temple. Indulgences YIKES !
 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,195
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
yes a false gospel of works, penance, purgatory - the more money you give the greater the sins forgiven. What a sham its the money changers all over again when Jesus turned over their tables in the Temple. Indulgences YIKES !
If somebody attacks your mother, what would you do? You will defend her, right? Especially if you really love your mother just like anybody else. Such is the case whenever I hear people questioning my belief (Catholic that is) about Mary the Mother of God. Now with Jesus being a brother to all of us, that makes us also Mary's children. That makes Mary our Mother too.
 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,195
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
yes a false gospel of works, penance, purgatory - the more money you give the greater the sins forgiven. What a sham its the money changers all over again when Jesus turned over their tables in the Temple. Indulgences YIKES !
Let's put the thread back on the right rails, shall we? Or does the topic frighten you that much?
 
Last edited:

Taken

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 6, 2018
24,655
13,033
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Catholic Doctrine It comes from Jesus Christ who taught before any NT Scripture was written.

Agree- Jesus taught the Word of God before it was Written.

Disagree (much) of Catholic Doctrine, is NOT found in Jesus' Doctrine.

It was Protestants who

Stopped following Catholic men.
Because Catholic men, Stopped following Jesus.

...started the unbiblical practice of inventing their theology from their cut down version of scripture.

Catholics all day Long declare their beliefs, and when asked by a Protestant Where that is in Scripture...

Excuses, Deception, Deflection

How is a Protestant to blame, because a Catholic is preaching what is NOT in Scripture?

That is why there are 40,000 protestants denominations, sects, cults and one pastor churches teaching different doctrines all supposedly from scripture.

40,000? LOL Can you prove that?
One Pastor? Can you prove that?
Different Doctrines? Can you prove that?

Do you follow your Bishop?
Or as Jesus Taught follow Jesus?

Taken