Billions of people have HD video cameras in their pockets: why aren't we seeing lots of miracles on video?

[lax16]

Because it’s easier to refute.

I was on jury duty some time back. Assault. Drug deal gone wrong. If the guy who had been assaulted had just said: ‘that girl in the dock and her boyfriend beat me up’ I reckon she might have been convicted. But his defence council kept asking more questions, getting more details. He enjoyed his moment. Just kept giving more and more information. Adding more to the story. Which he thought was adding weight to his case.

But the opposite happened. Parts of the story weren’t credible. Parts were obvious lies. Parts of his story contradicted other parts. Other people contradicted a lot of what he said.

The evidence was weak, or so he must have thought. So he kept adding to it. And the more he added, the more could be checked. And the more it was found to be false.

Someone way back, may have been another forum, pointed out that the blob of light he had found on a web site was definitely Mary. You could even make out her halo. Which was too much evidence as it was pointed out that halos were a 16th century artistic convention. Why on earth would Mary be wearing one if she made an appearance? Just to look like her pictures?

You are comparing the appearance of Mary to hundreds of thousands of people, possibly millions, that was captured on photograph to a single person’s testimony about his drug deal gone bad?

The OP has stated there is a lack of documented evidence for miracles. I provided documented evidence and you claim it is…???

 

[lax16]

Now we’re cookin’!

I LOVE these questions. Let’s start a new thread. You want to do it or should I?

“How do we know what evidence we’ll accept for religious authority claims?”

or

“If God knows what evidence people will accept, why doesn’t he provide it?”

or

“How do we know if God has provided sufficient evidence for a religious belief?”

or

“If God knows certain people will never be saved/believe/attain holiness, why create them in the fist place?”

or

"How do religious believers know they actually believe in their religion and aren’t just deceiving themselves or mistaken about their true beliefs?

There are so many interesting discussions to be had arising from your observations.

God does provide evidence for religious belief. There are volumes written about it, movies made about it and people like me that could fill a few pages with it.

Even when presented with PHOTOGRAPHS of the Blessed Mother appearing in Egypt to hundreds of thousands of people from every religion, there are people who will say it is not so.

That is really the crux of the issue and should be the title of a new thread. “Why don’t people believe even when presented with numerous accounts of miracles?” or “Why don’t people see the miracles around them even when others do?”

 

[PumpkinCookie]

You are comparing the appearance of Mary to hundreds of thousands of people, possibly millions, that was captured on photograph to a single person’s testimony about his drug deal gone bad?

The OP has stated there is a lack of documented evidence for miracles. I provided documented evidence and you claim it is…???

The events at Zeitoun are questionable. How do we know what Mary looked like? Why hasn’t Egypt been converted to Coptic Catholicism?

blog.evangelicalrealism.com/2009/02/09/investigating-the-marian-apparition-at-zeitoun/

A close-up, color, authenticated HD video of a leg or arm re-growing at the request of a Catholic who invokes God’s endorsement of Catholicism would be far more convincing, I think.

 

[lax16]

The events at Zeitoun are questionable. How do we know what Mary looked like? Why hasn’t Egypt been converted to Coptic Catholicism?

blog.evangelicalrealism.com/2009/02/09/investigating-the-marian-apparition-at-zeitoun/

A close-up, color, authenticated HD video of a leg or arm re-growing at the request of a Catholic who invokes God’s endorsement of Catholicism would be far more convincing, I think.

Read and watch the eyewitness accounts of hundreds of thousands of people. Read the history of the Coptic Church. Why would they become Catholic? They love and believe in Mary just as the Catholics do.

Mary looks different in different apparitions. She appeared as light in Zeitoun due to the nature of the situation (read about it then you will understand). She appeared as a mestizo in Guadalupe.

Why would God change a person’s arm if he allowed the person to be born that way?

Why pick and choose what you consider to be miraculous?

 

[LethalMouse]

Now we’re cookin’!

I LOVE these questions. Let’s start a new thread. You want to do it or should I?

.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=1021555

 

[fladreamer]

Read and watch the eyewitness accounts of hundreds of thousands of people. Read the history of the Coptic Church. Why would they become Catholic? They love and believe in Mary just as the Catholics do.

Mary looks different in different apparitions. She appeared as light in Zeitoun due to the nature of the situation (read about it then you will understand). She appeared as a mestizo in Guadalupe.

Why would God change a person’s arm if he allowed the person to be born that way?

Why pick and choose what you consider to be miraculous?

Exactly. That is unless he was born blind.<—One of Jesus’ miracles in the NT.

The apostle Thomas witnessed countless(hyperbole) miracles from fish being multiplied, to lepres being healed, to Lazarus being raised from the dead, yet he needed to touch the holes left by the nails and spear in order to believe. So asking to witness a limb grow back in matters of minutes as evidence is not overkill IMO.

 

[lax16]

Exactly. That is unless he was born blind.,<—One of Jesus’ miracles in the NT.

Jesus healed many to prove his divinity. God does not need to change his creation to prove his existence. However, he can and he does.

bbc.com/news/world-europe-26334964

One of the posters here keeps claiming that miracles only count if someone’s arm grows back. Well, here are examples of people being miraculously restored.

 

[LethalMouse]

Read and watch the eyewitness accounts of hundreds of thousands of people. Read the history of the Coptic Church. Why would they become Catholic? They love and believe in Mary just as the Catholics do.

Mary looks different in different apparitions. She appeared as light in Zeitoun due to the nature of the situation (read about it then you will understand). She appeared as a mestizo in Guadalupe.

Why would God change a person’s arm if he allowed the person to be born that way?

Why pick and choose what you consider to be miraculous?

I for one find info like this make me glad the church doesn’t declare these things a required belief

 

[lax16]

I for one find info like this make me glad the church doesn’t declare these things a required belief

What things - that she appeared as a mestizo to the people that understood the meaning of her skin color??

 

[LethalMouse]

What things - that she appeared as a mestizo to the people that understood the meaning of her skin color??

So instead of Mary looking like Mary, she rolls in some wierd sociopolitical racial appeasements?

I just find it a mild stretch and a bit of self serving by the claimants.

I am wierd I suppose, but I like some miracles for sure but much of what many mainstream or maybe just “majority” of practicing catholics are about doesn’t float well with me.

If it weren’t for the notable differences between majority opinion and infallible teaching I wouldn’t be signed up for the ride.

So long as an declaration does not contradict current teaching the church says it is okay…sounds like something a claimant could intentionally conform to.

I am not saying it did not happen, only that such things are doubtworthy for sure.

TBH the anti catholics who use veneration of Mary as a negative aspect of Catholicism are highly incorrect as to what Catholicism is… but, again the fallible people to seem to sometimes walk a fine line

It all plays to a bunch of factors, but in the end I would think Mary to appear as a rather desert tan Jewish woman

Unless we could argue she is tan enough to appear Mestizo to people who would just assume she was tan like them… idk though facial features and all…

Oh and by “things” I meant apparitions.

 

[lax16]

So instead of Mary looking like Mary, she rolls in some wierd sociopolitical racial appeasements?

I just find it a mild stretch and a bit of self serving by the claimants.

I am wierd I suppose, but I like some miracles for sure but much of what many mainstream or maybe just “majority” of practicing catholics are about doesn’t float well with me.

If it weren’t for the notable differences between majority opinion and infallible teaching I wouldn’t be signed up for the ride.

So long as an declaration does not contradict current teaching the church says it is okay…sounds like something a claimant could intentionally conform to.

I am not saying it did not happen, only that such things are doubtworthy for sure.

TBH the anti catholics who use veneration of Mary as a negative aspect of Catholicism are highly incorrect as to what Catholicism is… but, again the fallible people to seem to sometimes walk a fine line

It all plays to a bunch of factors, but in the end I would think Mary to appear as a rather desert tan Jewish woman

Unless we could argue she is tan enough to appear Mestizo to people who would just assume she was tan like them… idk though facial features and all…

Oh and by “things” I meant apparitions.

She looks different in all of her apparitions. Perhaps it makes her look like the mother of all and builds bridges with the world showing we are all one.

Doubtworthy for some, certainty for others.

 

[Lion_IRC]

…As founder and spokesperson for The Rational Rat Pack, my official statement is:
Good comment! Yes!

.

Sorry to ask but since you are their official spokesperson, what is the Rational Rat Pack?
And what distinguishes your group from all the other rational people here at Catholic Answers?

Do you have to be a certain type of rational person?

 

[HelenRose]

The literature of the ancient world is full of fantastic miracles. Not only in religious texts, but the foundational narratives of all civilizations contain references to many miraculous and wondrous events. Humans turning into animals, witches, spells, griffins, centaurs, resurrections, healings, angels, giants, trolls, magic, nymphs, and all manner of supernatural and magical creatures and events fill our ancient texts. In various religious traditions we have numerous accounts of miracles attributed to saints, Jesus, Mary, the 12 Imams, various avatars of Krishna, etc.

So…why did all of these fantastic things just…stop? There are billions of people walking around with HD video cameras in their pockets (phones). At any moment, anywhere in the world, there is a high probability that an event can be captured on video and uploaded to the internet within minutes. Not only do billions of people have cameras, but we have cameras orbiting our planet taking pictures of it continuously. Not only that, but there are security cameras all over the developed world.

This has revolutionized criminal justice, international relations, and the entire world economy. If miracles happened at all, it seems likely that at least some would be recorded in real time and uploaded to the internet, doesn’t it?

Imagine if Fatima happened today! If the same events happened today, our satellites could capture it, and the thousands of witnesses would have video from thousands of angles. People across the world would see the video and immediately convert to Catholicism. Imagine if just one person were able to speak “in tongues” on video and everyone in the world understood that person in their native languages simultaneously and miraculously.

So…where are these miracles? Why the total silence?

I sincerely doubt that God plans on doing tricks in order to be on Facebook.

 

[Lion_IRC]

…The apostle Thomas witnessed countless(hyperbole) miracles from fish being multiplied, to lepres being healed, to Lazarus being raised from the dead, yet he needed to touch the holes left by the nails and spear in order to believe.
.

I’m sorry, I don’t recall where in scripture it states that Thomas witnessed those events.
Could I trouble you to cite the verses?
TIA

 

[Lion_IRC]

I sincerely doubt that God plans on doing tricks in order to be on Facebook.

 

[fladreamer]

I’m sorry, I don’t recall where in scripture it states that Thomas witnessed those events.
Could I trouble you to cite the verses?
TIA

If it’s not written, it never happened? As an apostle you’d think he may have bee around Jesus, and as such may have witnessed some supernatural occurrences. Or maybe he was conveniently absent each and every time those occurred. While we’re at it, could you cite the verses detailing papal infallibility and the Virgin Mary’s Assumption, or Mary’s perpetual virginity? Thank you.

 

[fladreamer]

I sincerely doubt that God plans on doing tricks in order to be on Facebook.

That is your understanding of the gist of what PumpkinCookie is saying?

 

[LethalMouse]

She looks different in all of her apparitions. Perhaps it makes her look like the mother of all and builds bridges with the world showing we are all one.

Doubtworthy for some, certainty for others.

So she went to heaven bodily assumption to have her body glorified and it is glorified via morph?

I am just saying, not an athesit here or w/e but a Catholic skeptic of what random people say.

And no I am not saying it disproves anything, but the aspects of theology it seems many cling to are the more doubtworthy IMO.

There are much better things other than Mary appearing to poor people who gain more from being the seers of Mary in Morph form to look to for reasons to be Catholic and believe in God.

TBH it seems like a good idea if I was poor and obscure to say I was chatting with Mary and do a bit of research to check that I don’t claim anything “new” that would contradict the church to make me acceptable. Then I would be local-region celebrity and such and such and probably get all kinds of free lunch.

And ironically the sighting quoted from the atheist is one that actually makes more sense than some others to me. A heavenly lighted Mary sounds divine more than Mighty Morphin Mary who is a nationality andface changer.

I actually would say given the situation there and the simple show of faith of her appearance to the Christians stuck in Islamic control seems highly sensible verses any random poor lady or 3 kids having chats with the morph.

 

[lax16]

So she went to heaven bodily assumption to have her body glorified and it is glorified via morph?

I am just saying, not an athesit here or w/e but a Catholic skeptic of what random people say.

And no I am not saying it disproves anything, but the aspects of theology it seems many cling to are the more doubtworthy IMO.

There are much better things other than Mary appearing to poor people who gain more from being the seers of Mary in Morph form to look to for reasons to be Catholic and believe in God.

TBH it seems like a good idea if I was poor and obscure to say I was chatting with Mary and do a bit of research to check that I don’t claim anything “new” that would contradict the church to make me acceptable. Then I would be local-region celebrity and such and such and probably get all kinds of free lunch.

And ironically the sighting quoted from the atheist is one that actually makes more sense than some others to me. A heavenly lighted Mary sounds divine more than Mighty Morphin Mary who is a nationality andface changer.

I actually would say given the situation there and the simple show of faith of her appearance to the Christians stuck in Islamic control seems highly sensible verses any random poor lady or 3 kids having chats with the morph.

I was the one who posted about our Lady of Light and I am not an atheist.

It is obvious you have not studied the apparitions and what was going on at the time. Her appearances coincide with events in history. It is not as simplistic as you seem to think and there is much to learn about the apparitions. Why assume otherwise?

I am really surprised by posters that claim to be healthy skeptics when in reality they are just skeptics…

 

[MPat]

I haven’t heard yet of any proof of God’s existence that sounds as you describe, above. Of course they can exist.

And don’t you find it strange that you haven’t heard of any argument demonstrating God’s existence that was too hard for you to understand and made your head hurt?

After all, it shouldn’t take much: the proofs that 0.999… = 1 were almost trivial, and yet they did make your head hurt.

So, how comes you didn’t run into a single argument for existence of God that, good or bad, made your head hurt?

The hypothesis that there are no such arguments can be safely rejected: even if they were bad, they should have been sufficiently complex to fool the people who are much better at understanding proofs than you are (we have already established existence of such people - there are people who understand the proofs that made your head hurt).

So, could it be that when you run into a proof demonstrating that 0.999… = 1, you try to understand it and then it makes your head hurt, but when you run into a complex proof showing existence of God, you simply dismiss it out of hand without putting in any effort, and thus it doesn’t make your head hurt?

How do professors punish students for failing?
I don’t know of any professors who do this. Giving a bad grade, if that’s what you mean, wouldn’t be “punishment”. It would just be marking their exam.

So, you mean that an action that might easily result in significant financial loss (for example, having to pay for retaking of the module), or even in a forced change of career plans is not punishment in any relevant way? Good, then God just marks your life.

I see what you are trying to say here, but I don’t think it’s a good analogy. A student is in a classroom of their own choice–even pays to be there–because they want to learn what the prof is teaching them. The prof is being paid to do a job. The prof doesn’t have to try and convince the student to come to class.
And, in this scenario, it’s entirely possible that the student could be smarter and know *more *than the prof.

I’m afraid that the things you say here show a complete lack of understanding of how the educational system really functions (not just universities - it is not hard to change “professor” to “teacher” in my analogy; that should finish off the claim that there is nothing compulsory in here)…

I guess I’ll just give you a link to phdcomics.com/… Those might be just comic strips, but they give a description of educational system that is much closer to reality… And they’re funny - they shouldn’t make your head hurt.