• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Mother Terisa gets there at last

The UK Audit confirmed it.

At the very least do you want us to believe this is a good charity? If so, where's the accounting of the money?
 
Last edited:
The Big Dog said:
Gainsaying is not disputing. We have a claim (quoted above) that there were 100's of posts of evidence 'confirming that the
money donated to her was very poorly spent on her missions. Most of it went to the Catholic Church." I know that there was not.

There is no legitimate evidence in this thread or otherwise.
You got it? Post it.
Click to expand...

I agree that many posts here present no legitimate evidence, particularly those with short and snide "responses." But remember- my post that started this latest exchange simply recognized that you do not accept the posts upthread as evidence (which you have now further proved as true of your position). I stated that I was OK with that (i.e. you and I disagreeing), but for some reason you chose to challenge my position as the wrong use of the term 'K. It still seems like the correct use(s) of 'K to me. Do you typically follow your use of 'K with evidence?- I thought you used it as acceptance of the disagreement and therefore not requiring a need to present evidence.

BTW- we appear to agree that MT donated much or all of what she raised to the Catholic Church- is there any dispute about that? As to whether that money was poorly spent on health care in her missions/clinics is much of what the dispute here has focused on. Further- whether it was poorly or well spent in general will always be a matter of the individual's opinion and judgement. If I feel it was poorly spent it would be difficult to come up with evidence against my feeling (unless you could prove that I really felt otherwise and was lying).

.
 
Just checking in... are we allowed to pray to her yet?

I want to see what powers she got but I don't want to risk blasphemy. Is there a waiting period or can I just start praying to her right away?
 
The Big Dog said:
where was that linked
Click to expand...

I am tempted to ask, "Where is your evidence/link that supports your claim?" However today (Saturday) is the sabbath in my original religion, so in the interest of a peaceful sabbath I accept that you believe your claim to be correct and that you and I simply disagree. 'K by me (for now). May the Lord, YHWH, bless you (or at least not give you boils).
 
marplots said:
Just checking in... are we allowed to pray to her yet?

I want to see what powers she got but I don't want to risk blasphemy. Is there a waiting period or can I just start praying to her right away?
Click to expand...

Wasn't it people praying to her and being healed a justification for her canonization? I think that you can pray to her right away. However you may be placed on call waiting if there are a lot of other people trying to get through at the same time:

"Hello. You have reached Heaven. Please listen carefully because the options may have changed. If you wish to pray to a Saint, please press 1. If you wish to speak to God directly, press 2. If you are just invoking God's name in vain, please dial Hell at 666-6666."
(1)

Beep- "If you wish to pray to Saint Peter, press 1. If you wish to pray to Saint Christopher, press 2. If you wish to pray to Saint Teresa, press 3..."
(3)

Beep- "If your prayer is seeking to be convinced that pain is good for you, please press 1. If your prayer is seeking an improvement in your health, please press 2. ...
(1)

Beep- "Due to the unusually large number of calls at this time, Saint Teresa is temporarily busy. If you hold on the line your call will be answered in the order received. Heaven appreciates your business and we thank you for your patience."
 
The Big Dog said:
of course you would not, that would be flipping the burden on me, ya know?
Click to expand...

Not flipping the burden at all- statements on either side logically require evidence to support them. Neither side of this discussion is equivalent to the position that Big Foot, for example, does not exist- non-existence is the default position in such a circumstance and does not require evidence, whereas claiming Big Foot does exist does requires evidence.

In the current discussion, one side claims that Mother Teresa did not provide appropriate medical assistance in her missions and the other side claims that she did and/or provided financial resources to other elements in the Catholic church that did provide appropriate health care. Neither is a default- both require evidence to establish their validity.

Why would you feel that you do not have to provide evidence but that the people who disagree with you do?

I did not give into my temptation to ask not because I thought it would be unfair of me to ask, but because I felt it would be useless for me to ask. Plus my goal of enjoying this marvelous, God-given Saturday in peace and joy! Joy be onto you too!
 
Last edited:
Elind said:
Not so common? Hell, they can be found in burnt toast images anywhere on YouTube, not to mention evidence for flat earth.

Where there is a will there is a way, if it serves a purpose for someone.
Click to expand...


:D:D:D

I was dating a lady, (ex Catholic), who had a Jesuit priest brother.

When we met I asked him why there are no more miracles these days. "But there are", he responded, "Every time a priest turns the wafer and wine into the actual body and blood of Jesus it's a miracle."

Needless to say I was less than impressed.
 
Giordano said:
Not flipping the burden at all- statements on either side logically require evidence to support them. Neither side of this discussion is equivalent to the position that Big Foot, for example, does not exist- non-existence is the default position in such a circumstance and does not require evidence, whereas claiming Big Foot does exist does requires evidence.

In the current discussion, one side claims that Mother Teresa did not provide appropriate medical assistance in her missions and the other side claims that she did and/or provided financial resources to other elements in the Catholic church that did provide appropriate health care. Neither is a default- both require evidence to establish their validity.

Why would you feel that you do not have to provide evidence but that the people who disagree with you do?

I did not give into my temptation to ask not because I thought it would be unfair of me to ask, but because I felt it would be useless for me to ask. Plus my goal of enjoying this marvelous, God-given Saturday in peace and joy! Joy be onto you too!
Click to expand...

But I was told that there were 100's of posts!

Surely you can point me to one to support the slurs against Mother Teresa.

Surely.
 
The Big Dog said:
But I was told that there were 100's of posts!

Surely you can point me to one to support the slurs against Mother Teresa.

Surely.
Click to expand...

My point throughout our current exchange hasn't been- "Look at all this evidence that MT was evil," despite your continued efforts to change the subject to this. My point remains that (1) you are demanding evidence of others without being willing to present evidence yourself, and (2) you do not believe that the evidence already presented in this thread as to MT's dark side is adequate or legitimate, so why would I spend the effort to find and site specific examples of this evidence only to have you casually dismiss my efforts with a " 'k," emoticon, or "Wrong." I think the evidence is very convincing that MT was a horribly conflicted, self-contradictory, flawed individual who did a great deal of harm as well as some good; you don't (or at least claim you don't). 'k.

Notably when you were very recently requested to cite specific examples of the prior posts in which you presented evidence for your claims, you refused, objecting that the relevant posts were already there and therefore why should you expend the effort (I think that you also implied the such a request was insulting to you). If that type of response is good enough for you, then it's good enough for me. I am only seeking to learn from you (even though I don't think that I've yet fully figured out all the correct uses of 'k).

I had a wonderful sabbath yesterday- I hope that God graced yours as well (assuming it was today)! Funny how different religions can all abide by the concept of the 7th day being a day of rest and reflection, but disagree on what day of the week that is!
 
Giordano said:
My point throughout our current exchange hasn't been- "Look at all this evidence that MT was evil," despite your continued efforts to change the subject to this. My point remains that (1) you are demanding evidence of others without being willing to present evidence yourself, and (2) you do not believe that the evidence already presented in this thread as to MT's dark side is adequate or legitimate, so why would I spend the effort to find and site specific examples of this evidence only to have you casually dismiss my efforts with a " 'k," emoticon, or "Wrong." I think the evidence is very convincing that MT was a horribly conflicted, self-contradictory, flawed individual who did a great deal of harm as well as some good; you don't (or at least claim you don't). 'k.

Notably when you were very recently requested to cite specific examples of the prior posts in which you presented evidence for your claims, you refused, objecting that the relevant posts were already there and therefore why should you expend the effort (I think that you also implied the such a request was insulting to you). If that type of response is good enough for you, then it's good enough for me. I am only seeking to learn from you (even though I don't think that I've yet fully figured out all the correct uses of 'k).

I had a wonderful sabbath yesterday- I hope that God graced yours as well (assuming it was today)! Funny how different religions can all abide by the concept of the 7th day being a day of rest and reflection, but disagree on what day of the week that is!
Click to expand...

I would be delighted to dig out the link to my post if and when the proponent tries to support his claim. I know I won't have to bother because the claim is ********.

Qed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom