Another Virgin Mary Sighting

[shropshire 0]

So, you 2 going to hug or what?




That's me adding to the debate - useful aint I

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[kallend 1,648]

Quote

Quote

My whole issue with this (womans .02) Is that if you are a religious person it clearly states in Exodus 20:4-5, "You shall not make for yourself a carved image, any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God."

These people are "hovering over it and placing rose petals, candles and praying at the base of it" Whats up with that?? I am not a Catholic, I do not believe that you have to go to confession all you need to do is look up and pray, God will hear you. I do believe that God gives us little reminders as to how close He is in our daily life, but I think He is disappointed when we take it too far. This is, IMPO, taking it too far (the whole chocolate statue thing).

Bobbi

Again you raise cogent points. There are those in the Catholic Church who can easily be accused of "idol worship" by the way they apparent fawn over what appears to be miraculous images from heaven in edible objects and the like.

However, your quote from Exodus needs a little explanation. If the verse in Exodus means what you think it means, and you want to be a faithful bible-believing person and follow said book, you must immediately dispose of all of your pictures. Your wedding album, your baby photos, your skydiving memories, etc. You shall not make for yourself any likeness of anything.. that is in the earth beneath."

Is this really what this verse means? We can't have any sort of representations of the objects of our affection? Does this really mean that we can't have reminders of what is important to us? The important events in our lives? All of you with a cross around your neck then, you must throw it out.

On the other hand, the issue here is about idolatry: WORSHIPING these images, as if the statue or the picture or the representation were the thing itself that they merely symbolize.

This is one of the most fundamental misconceptions that non-catholics have against catholics. They often see Catholics praying at the foot of a statue of Mary or Jesus or a saint and they think we're worshiping the statue. Not true. Instead, we're communicating with the PERSON that the image represents. Haven't you ever looked lovingly at the face of your significant other, or your grandmother, or whomever and said "talked" to them? Is the act of having the image of them hanging from your wall an act of worshiping THEM, either the picture OR the person? No, rather it's a reminder to you of who you love. Of who is important to you. That is what statues are to the Catholic. They help keep us grounded, focused on what is important. They remind of what our goal is -to get to Heaven, and of who went before us marked w/ the sign of faith.

Now, that having been said, I agree... people who are bowing before chocolate, IMO, may have a little eccentricity in them. There may BE some idolatry. But this is far different from the practice of having statues and icons and paintings of saints in our churches and homes.

That's just weasel-wording your way out of a fundamental contradiction in your church's dogma.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

My whole issue with this (womans .02) Is that if you are a religious person it clearly states in Exodus 20:4-5, "You shall not make for yourself a carved image, any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God."

These people are "hovering over it and placing rose petals, candles and praying at the base of it" Whats up with that?? I am not a Catholic, I do not believe that you have to go to confession all you need to do is look up and pray, God will hear you. I do believe that God gives us little reminders as to how close He is in our daily life, but I think He is disappointed when we take it too far. This is, IMPO, taking it too far (the whole chocolate statue thing).

Bobbi

Again you raise cogent points. There are those in the Catholic Church who can easily be accused of "idol worship" by the way they apparent fawn over what appears to be miraculous images from heaven in edible objects and the like.

However, your quote from Exodus needs a little explanation. If the verse in Exodus means what you think it means, and you want to be a faithful bible-believing person and follow said book, you must immediately dispose of all of your pictures. Your wedding album, your baby photos, your skydiving memories, etc. You shall not make for yourself any likeness of anything.. that is in the earth beneath."

Is this really what this verse means? We can't have any sort of representations of the objects of our affection? Does this really mean that we can't have reminders of what is important to us? The important events in our lives? All of you with a cross around your neck then, you must throw it out.

On the other hand, the issue here is about idolatry: WORSHIPING these images, as if the statue or the picture or the representation were the thing itself that they merely symbolize.

This is one of the most fundamental misconceptions that non-catholics have against catholics. They often see Catholics praying at the foot of a statue of Mary or Jesus or a saint and they think we're worshiping the statue. Not true. Instead, we're communicating with the PERSON that the image represents. Haven't you ever looked lovingly at the face of your significant other, or your grandmother, or whomever and said "talked" to them? Is the act of having the image of them hanging from your wall an act of worshiping THEM, either the picture OR the person? No, rather it's a reminder to you of who you love. Of who is important to you. That is what statues are to the Catholic. They help keep us grounded, focused on what is important. They remind of what our goal is -to get to Heaven, and of who went before us marked w/ the sign of faith.

Now, that having been said, I agree... people who are bowing before chocolate, IMO, may have a little eccentricity in them. There may BE some idolatry. But this is far different from the practice of having statues and icons and paintings of saints in our churches and homes.

That's just weasel-wording your way out of a fundamental contradiction in your church's dogma.

That's just you refusing to try to understand what the Catholic Church really believes b/c you have a strong prejudice against it.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[Squeak 17]

Quote

That's just you refusing to try to understand what the Catholic Church really believes b/c you have a strong prejudice against it.

No No Micheal that's just you misreading what John wrote, that seems to be your take on things that I object to about your postings, I dont follow your dogma ergo I misread or dont understand what you type.
Well if that IS the case type in ENGLISH, and in a manner which can not be misinterpreted, becasue me and my IQ which incidently sits about 2 standard deviations above the mean, must be really reading you so wrong

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[micro 0]

Quote

becasue (sic) me and my IQ which incidently sits about 2 standard deviations above the mean

hmm... was this measured on the WISC or was it the WISC-R?

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[Squeak 17]

Quote

Quote

becasue (sic) me and my IQ which incidently sits about 2 standard deviations above the mean

hmm... was this measured on the WISC or was it the WISC-R?

i've had several done and the current mean is 150 last one was R

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[Dolph 0]

Quote

I think we all could use this as a reminder, ME INCLUDED, that ya know, there are some topics that just shouldn't be the source of an attempt at "humor." This is obvoiusly one of them. (That's assuming, of course, that the poster was, in fact, attempting to be funny.)

Some Danish cartoonists got into a lot of trouble for making half-funny cartoons of Mohammed. The resulting boycot cost Danish companies millions. A number of Muslim people were killed in riots and some of our embassies were burned.

We claim free speech. The newspaper printed it to test the limits of self censorship and free speech.

You're American, so I suppose you support free speech in some ways. Are you suggesting that all religious, controversial or somewhat sensitive issues should be excluded from free speech, sort of ike yelling 'fire!' in a packed cinema?

[Erroll 49]

Quote

So to expect or ask that everyone be respectful is almost an impossible request.

Absolutely. Although I seldom contribute to discussions here, I read most of them. Respect is a trait not often displayed in this forum.
I gather that is one of the benefits[sic] of freedom of speech.

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

becasue (sic) me and my IQ which incidently sits about 2 standard deviations above the mean

hmm... was this measured on the WISC or was it the WISC-R?

i've had several done and the current mean is 150 last one was R

Well, if the last one was the R, no wonder you tested so high... you were tested on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for CHILDREN (Revised)

And another thing, Einstein, the mean for most intelligence assessments is 100, w/ a standard deviation of either 10, 15 or 16 ( as in the case of the locus classicus, the Stanford Benet). Two standard deviations above the mean would never be more than 132, which would place you above 95% of the population in terms of intelligence (highly unlikely, IMO). If you scored a 150 in any of true intelligence tests, you've either cheated or you're smarter than Einstein himself. Either that or the test you took was an IQ test out of Cosmo.

edited to add... squeak, i don't doubt that you are a very smart man. your many posts certainly play that out. and your choice of careers point to a well-discerned, cogent plan of life as well....

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[Squeak 17]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

becasue (sic) me and my IQ which incidently sits about 2 standard deviations above the mean

hmm... was this measured on the WISC or was it the WISC-R?

i've had several done and the current mean is 150 last one was R

Well, if the last one was the R, no wonder you tested so high... you were tested on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for CHILDREN (Revised)

And another thing, Einstein, the mean for most intelligence assessments is 100, w/ a standard deviation of either 10, 15 or 16 ( as in the case of the locus classicus, the Stanford Benet). Two standard deviations above the mean would never be more than 132, which would place you above 95% of the population in terms of intelligence (highly unlikely, IMO). If you scored a 150 in any of true intelligence tests, you've either cheated or you're smarter than Einstein himself. Either that or the test you took was an IQ test out of Cosmo.

edited to add... squeak, i don't doubt that you are a very smart man. your many posts certainly play that out. and your choice of careers point to a well-discerned, cogent plan of life as well....

Dude remember what I do for a living.
I said the last one i did was the R, i didnt say i scored 150 in it, Must be one of those mis reading thing you're fond of

ETA the 1st Time I took the WISC (as a juvinile) I scored 137 so doubt all you like as unlikely as it may seem to you I am considered to have a higher IQ than the average bear.

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[micro 0]

Quote

Must be one of those mis reading thing you're fond of

well, with sentences like this one,

Quote

i've had several done and the current mean is 150 last one was R

how can NOT misread it, Einstein?

just a couple of notes... the mean for the WISC-R is 100, not 150. w/ a score of 137, which is a bit more than 2 SDs above the mean, you'd be above more than 95% of all the population in intelligence... quite a rarity indeed. We're truly honored to be in the presence of such greatness.

I've grown tired of hearing you brag of your "superior" intelligence, squeaker. You know wha they say about those who feel the need to whip out the scores of their intelligence tests (or the amount of the salaries, or the size of their bank accounts, etc.)...

And I've also grown tired of you laughing at my beliefs... it takes a mighty BIG (and obviously intelligent man) to publically mock and ridicule another man's religious beliefs. Says alot about you, bro. Just try not to pass on this miscreant trait to the impressionable youth you serve.

See ya around squeaker.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[Nightingale 0]

Quote

Just remember how intelligence is distributed. Recall the bell curve? Contrary to what the modern day cultural elitists lead you to believe, IQ has a normative distribution even among (GASP!)

I'd like to know where you're getting your data, as mine indicates that this isn't the case.

Burnham P. Beckwit, in his article "The Effect of Intelligence on Religious Faith" (1986) summarized the major studies done on religiousity and IQ. All but four of the forty-three polls listed support the conclusion that native intelligence varies inversely with degree of religious faith; i.e., that, other factors being equal, the more intelligent a person is, the less religious he/she is.

His summary:

Sixteen studies of the correlation between individual measures of student intelligence and religiosity, all but three of which reported an inverse correlation. Five studies reporting that student bodies with high average IQ and/or SAT scores are far less religious than lower-scoring student bodies. Three studies reporting that geniuses (IQ 3+ standard deviations above average) are much less religious than the general public. Seven studies reporting that highly successful persons are much less religious in belief than are others; and eight old and four new Gallup polls revealing that college alumni (average IQ about one standard deviation above average) are much less religious in belief than are grade-school pollees.

Other studies:
A 1959 study of a group with IQs over 140 found that of men, 10 percent held strong religious belief, of women 18 percent (Terman). Sixty-two percent of men and 57 percent of women claimed "little religious inclination" while 28 percent of the men and 23 percent of the women claimed it was "not at all important."

A 1968 study (Southern and Plant) of Mensa members found that they had fewer religious beliefs than the typical American college alumnus or adult.

A survey (Larson and Witham, 1998) of the 517 members of the United States National Academy of Sciences showed that 72.2% of the members expressed "personal disbelief" in a personal God while 20.8% expressed "doubt or agnosticism" and only 7.0% expressed "personal belief".

[MattM 0]

Quote

becasue me and my IQ which incidently sits about 2 standard deviations above the mean, must be really reading you so wrong

Was grammar included in that IQ test?

Comments like those above make you look like a prick by the way.

Matt

[SpeedRacer 1]

doesn't explain Pope John Paul II, CS Lewis, or Thomas Aquinas, however.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[micro 0]

Quote

doesn't explain Pope John Paul II, CS Lewis, or Thomas Aquinas, however.

oh, i'm sure some here will say one of the following:

1. These peope are not examples of intelligence.

2. They are statistical outliers.

3. Or insert some other lame ass excuse to support the myth that Christians are dumb.

As for refuting Nightingale's studies, I don't currently have access to any scientific article databases that have examined intelligence and religious belief and I wouldn't want to rely on "just the internet" for my sources, b/c as we all know, you just can't believe everything you read on the internet!

A closing statement on intelligence and the bell curve in general... things that have a normative distribution, such as intelligence, the corresponding "bell curve" is known to be very robust and not easily skewed. Studies on intelligence, from what I can recall, that have occurred across races, ethnicities, religions and other demographies have shown that intelligence is, in fact, distributed on a normative basis. Egro, being Christian is not ipso facto a predictor of being less intelligent.

I'm quite confident that if you took a truly representative sampling (the key word being TRULY!) of Christians, the faith in question here, I'm sure you'd see that their range of intelligence is quite similar to that of the general population. Most are lumped somewhere in the middle, with fewer and fewer being very smart and very "dumb."

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[Nightingale 0]

Of course you're going to have some people who are very intelligent. The studies above discuss AVERAGES of groups as a whole, not individuals.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I'm quite confident that if you took a truly representative sampling (the key word being TRULY!) of Christians, the faith in question here, I'm sure you'd see that their range of intelligence is quite similar to that of the general population.

ahh - the achilles heel of polling statistics. How do you tell if the sample is biased from the start?

It usually is. And when it's not, the pollster is and he hides the interactions (such as he only polled low income families on the religious side while collecting all the 'non-religious' data from the college debate team, etc)

collinearity is a bitch -

But NGale's post said 'religious' not just Christian, so easier to just reference that as well.

(I agree with you, there likely no statistical difference int he IQ disties from an unbiased sampling of christians vs a similarly collected sample of non-religious types - all other things like income, education, location, etc tracked and correctly accounted for in the analysis.)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Nightingale 0]

Quote

As for refuting Nightingale's studies, I don't currently have access to any scientific article databases that have examined intelligence and religious belief and I wouldn't want to rely on "just the internet" for my sources, b/c as we all know, you just can't believe everything you read on the internet!

... I'm quite confident that if you took a truly representative sampling (the key word being TRULY!) of Christians, the faith in question here, I'm sure you'd see that their range of intelligence is quite similar to that of the general population. Most are lumped somewhere in the middle, with fewer and fewer being very smart and very "dumb."

When you find a source other than your own opinion, please let me know. I'd be interested to read it.

As for believing what you read on the internet: Of course not. Just like you can't believe everything you hear and see. What you can do is use your critical thinking skills and weigh the evidence. Look at which sources are reliable, and which ones probably aren't. The internet is a fabulous resource if used properly, and I wish more schools would teach their students how to use it before they get to college and end up citing less than reliable sources.

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

As for refuting Nightingale's studies, I don't currently have access to any scientific article databases that have examined intelligence and religious belief and I wouldn't want to rely on "just the internet" for my sources, b/c as we all know, you just can't believe everything you read on the internet!

... I'm quite confident that if you took a truly representative sampling (the key word being TRULY!) of Christians, the faith in question here, I'm sure you'd see that their range of intelligence is quite similar to that of the general population. Most are lumped somewhere in the middle, with fewer and fewer being very smart and very "dumb."

When you find a source other than your own opinion, please let me know. I'd be interested to read it.

As for believing what you read on the internet: Of course not. Just like you can't believe everything you hear and see. What you can do is use your critical thinking skills and weigh the evidence. Look at which sources are reliable, and which ones probably aren't. The internet is a fabulous resource if used properly, and I wish more schools would teach their students how to use it before they get to college and end up citing less than reliable sources.

errata: I wasn't meaning to imply that your sources were culled from the internet and were therefore faulty, but rather, had I gleaned some from the 'net which refuted yours, I'm sure some poor sod on here would try to discredit them simply b/c they are from the WWW.

and btw, I'm not speaking from my own opinion, I'm going on what I recall from my graduate education in clinical psych, wherein intellectual assessment played a big part as well as six years of clinical experience as a therapist and neuropsychological examiner performing intelligence assessments (WAIS, WISC, WPPSI, S-B, etc.) and other batteries on a wide variety of people. In theory and practice, I've just not seen people of religion, Christian or otherwise, as being less intelligent than those who are not. However, I HAVE seen that widely promulgated as a myth by those w/ a socio-political agenda.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[Nightingale 0]

Like I said, I'd really like to read your sources, so please PM them to me, if you don't wish to post them on the forum.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

Like I said, I'd really like to read your sources, so please PM them to me, if you don't wish to post them on the forum.

Just my .02

Having been raised in a fundamentalist Christian church in the deep south, and having some understanding of statistics and bell curves, here's my observation:

Growing up, my goal was to be a preacher. I knew alot of people that weren't the sharpest tacks in the box with regards to formal IQ.

In college, and subsequently, I knew alot of people who were the sharpest tacks in the box with regards to formal IQ.

I graduated summa cum laude in chemical engineering from LSU, a school that takes its chemical engineering very seriously, and from which alot of Exxon senior managers are alumni.

My take on this thread is, there are multiple curves in practice here.

1) General IQ curve
2) "Religousity" curve, for the lack of a better phrase.

Applying the "Religousity" curve to the lower part of the General IQ curve would show that alot of people believe in one of the formal religions.

Applying the "Religousity" curve to the higher part of the General IQ curve would show that alot of people don't believe in of the formal religions.

I include myself in the latter group. I consider myself to be a very spiritual person, and that God is beyond belief. God is. It's the interpretation of God that's the primary difference between the two groups.

After many years of searching and study, it finally dawned on me personally that God is best viewed as a verb (as in flow), not a noun. Things started making much more sense to me after that realization.

We are all engines of karma

[Channman 2]

> Three studies reporting that geniuses (IQ 3+ standard deviations above average) are much less religious than the general public.

What was that quote, "Thinking themselves to be wise, they became fools."

[Squeak 17]

Quote

Quote

Must be one of those mis reading thing you're fond of

well, with sentences like this one,

Quote

***i've had several done and the current mean is 150 last one was R

how can NOT misread it, Einstein? OK since I apprently need to break this down for you I will, the cuurent mean is MY mean for the tests I have taken.
The LAST test I sat was the "R" becasue in my job we (not me Uni pyschs) give the test to some of our kids, the kids ask me to do it, and since there are very few thing I would ask of them that i wont do myself, I obliged then hapily

Quote

just a couple of notes... the mean for the WISC-R is 100, not 150. w/ a score of 137, which is a bit more than 2 SDs above the mean, you'd be above more than 95% of all the population in intelligence... quite a rarity indeed. We're truly honored to be in the presence of such greatness.

As i said before my mean not the tests mean, and yeah you should feel honoured

Quote

I've grown tired of hearing you brag of your "superior" intelligence, squeaker. You know wha they say about those who feel the need to whip out the scores of their intelligence tests (or the amount of the salaries, or the size of their bank accounts, etc.)...

I havn't mentioned my intelligence at all, only my mean IQ score. (and yes I know what the 2 little letters mean).
Well I brought this up because you felt the need to comment on how you beleive the bell curve works, nighingale adressess this in a post below. AlsoI acutaly put VERY little stock in IQ tests the are biased in many ways and I dont beleive there are all that accurate, particularly in a one of situation, moreover you can be taught to do better in them.

Quote

And I've also grown tired of you laughing at my beliefs... it takes a mighty BIG (and obviously intelligent man) to publically mock and ridicule another man's religious beliefs. Says alot about you, bro. Just try not to pass on this miscreant trait to the impressionable youth you serve.

Kindly point out where I have laughed at your BELIEFS, I have taken the piss out of YOU not you beliefs, I'm all for people having faith in what ever they choose, just don try foisting it on the gen pop. As for the kids in my charge one of the most important things I think I try to instill in them is tollerance, not just the paying lip service to it like you appear to.

Quote

See ya around squeaker.

Not if I see you 1st Sinker

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[Squeak 17]

Quote

Quote

becasue me and my IQ which incidently sits about 2 standard deviations above the mean, must be really reading you so wrong

Was grammar included in that IQ test?

Comments like those above make you look like a prick by the way.

Thank you for you well thought out comments And try not to confuse an IQ score with academic learning (as so many other people do) tthey are so different from each other

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[Skyrad 0]

'All because our Lady loves milk tray!'

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca