if there is a God why doesnt he show him selfgreenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread |
i will believe if god shows himself and i think that there are many others behind me when i say that but why doesnt he show himself
-- stefan koster (stefanpuntcom@hotmail.com), May 27, 2003
i think jesus or godhas failed for the human people
there is to much suffering
-- bobbejaan (bobbejaan_land@hotmail.com), May 27, 2003.
God shows Himself to those who seek Him with a sincere heart. Ask and you will receive. Seek and you will find. Knock and the door will be opened. This is His guarantee to you. He will not force Himself upon you, but He will certainly respond to your request, and reveal Himself in ways you can clearly perceive.God has provided everything human beings need for happiness, peace, and personal fulfilment. The majority of human suffering is the result of people rejecting what God has offered us, and doing it "my way" instead of His way. Such an approach to life will inevitably lead to conflict, pain, and dissatisfaction with life.
-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 27, 2003.
Stefan, God shows himself in many ways: A) In person (rarely) B)In a dream (sometimes) c) in the voice of angels (many times) D) In the voice of other human beings , and e) in your neigbor (family, people you meet...)I myself can attest to all except A. Moses was the only one I remember reading about who did.
As for suffering: he gave us free choice. Some of the evil in this world comes or is caused by or from : a) us, others, born with it, or bad luck. Even the most evil people cannot endure forever: Caligula, Attila, Hitler, Saddam Hussein,....
God sometimes moves the leaders from some nations to go against others to enforce justice: The Spaniards put a stop to the cannibalism practiced by the Aztecs and other indigenous indian nations of America. The English, French, and USA put a stop to slavery by the Spaniards. It took a civil war to end slavery in the USA. It took world war I and World war II to put and end to the forced opium trade with China by the english. The USA invaded Iraq twice in 1991 and 2003.
When we get close to him: a) he may listen, b) he may ignore us if we continue to sin, c)he may put us to the test.
-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 27, 2003.
Elpidio:
You're making this up: The English, French, and USA put a stop to slavery by the Spaniards. I'm not surprised.These poor kids have a bad start already; and getting your so-called help is sure to make them worse, IMO.
-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 27, 2003.
+Elpidio,
You are not quite the teacher these kids need. You spread falsehood. I have to warn them not to put ANY confidence in what you have to say. You are opposed to the doctrines of the Catholic Church, first; and you make up fiction to pass off as fact, --second. Bad medicine for already sick kids. You aer a shaman of the Big Sham.
-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 27, 2003.
You know quite well that the Spaniards enslaved the Indians in Latin America. When De las casas protested the mistreatment of the Indians in the XVI century,, they began to import African Slaves. At first the English and French joined with the Spaniards. They brought slaves into the plantations, especially the caribbean.When the French under Napoleon took over Spain, the people in Latinoamerica rose against the Spaniards in wars of independance. Mexico's first constitution prohibited slavery (1824).
England passed laws which prohibited slavery ( especially from Africa).
To get workers, Chinese and people from India were brought either by lying to them or by kidnapping or by being sold by people who were owed debts. They came mostly to sugar plantations, coffee, banana,... When the United States attacked the Spanish provinces like Cuba, the Phillippines, it ended the servitude (slavery) of Chinese and Indians from India. Have you ever met Cuban Chinos or chinos peruanos, Eugene?
Now the USA didn't do it because they cared. The French didn't do it because they cared. It is always politics.
So who is the ignorant, Eugene?
-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 27, 2003.
Elpidio,
I'm well aware of the industrial abuses of private plantations; in many Cuban & South American empresas. it didn't take you to enlighten me.However, as bad as these may have been, there was very little commerce in slaves. The slave population as it were, was free. People were raised in servitude, but baptised and treated as human beings. The Church was quick to relieve their ignorance and suffering; it was only the moneyed classes which bought and sold them.
So, for you to bring charges against the Spanish as a people is unwarranted. Many Spaniards then as now, were sinners. But you identified the sin of slaveholding as the Spanish people. That's typical Marxist demagoguery.
You know very well most Spanish were Catholics by their faith commanded to love their neighbor. Whether he was Indian, black or white.
As opposed to the U.S., protestant and English freebooters-- another mind set altogether.
Here we have YOU crediting THEM with stopping Spanish oppression of slaves!!! A whopper if there has ever been one! You're actually identifying English & French opportunists and pirates-- privateers; with performing corporal works of mercy. Completely absurd.
-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 27, 2003.
Wayne
Do you think I'm a kid? Stupid, OK.I only ask of you; one thing: Tell us who is the Abraham Lincoln who freed the slaves in Mexico? Did Peru, or Bolivia or Argentina ever need a president as Great Emancipator? No. Only the United States.
There was little slave trade in Catholic Central-South America. No slaves needed for white men to grant them freedom. Racial equality, yes. Maybe-- But Catholic faithful never bought or sold slaves. That's a fact!
-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 31, 2003.
Maybe you should talk to Chris Butler. He said(before in this forum) he has the stigmatta, and has numerous "private revalations" from our Lord.wait, you mean chris "i wrote a constitution which oppresses women and anyone not catholic" butler thinks HE has the stigmata? AND private revelation too? now im beginning to see why bigots feel venerated for the 'work' they do.
-- paul (dontsendmemail@notanaddress.com), June 01, 2003.
If slaves are going to be turned free, first there has to be slavery. No one had to in the Latin American countries. Lincoln freed the American slaves.
-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), June 03, 2003.
Eugene, do you remember the encomienda system in Latinoamerica when it was ruled by Spain? It was a system where people were controlled by a landowner called an encomendero.Do you remember who fought the war for independance in Mexico? Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla, Jose Maria Morelos y Pavon. Both priests. Mexico's constitution was the first to abolish slavery in 1824. In 1910 Mexico's poor Catholic rural people fought against the catholic government of Porfirio Diaz who mainteained a semifeudal system controlled by tiendas de raya and the rurales.
Muslims also practiced slavery. Muhammad had a slave.
The catholic Portuguese began African slavery around 1450 when they began to circunavigate africa. Even the catholic King of the Congo protested to the Pope the inhuman trade practiced aginst his subjects around the 16th century.
The Protestant English traded African slaves to Catholic in the Antilles for sugar, which later was made into Whiskey. Whiskey sold to get money to get more slaves...
-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), June 04, 2003.
Elpidio The is a difference in the European Slave trade and the Muslim slave trade. A muslim slave has rights. They are paid and their children are not born into slavery. A muslim slave was not a piece of propery like the European slaves.
-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), June 15, 2003.