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

[buffalo]

Here is an old photograph of a miracle. youtube.com/watch?v=eCtDqCuhWNM

 

[Little_Tiger]

I think the evidence for all religions is pretty weak. Some worse than others.

.

Dear friend,
Please consult the following, or at least the DVD and one of the books, if you wish - shop.catholic.com/why-be-catholic.html
amazon.com/Faith-Certitude-Sure-Things-Matter/dp/089870054X
amazon.com/Evidence-Our-Faith-Joseph-Cavanaugh/dp/B002MSGXLI
amazon.com/Laying-Foundation-Handbook-Apologetics-Fundamental/dp/194144749X
As always, may the Lord God bless and keep you!

 

[LethalMouse]

Hi PumpkinCookie and LethalMouse -
You guys might wish to check out this book for detailed information on different Eucharistic miracles. The same author has written other good books as well on similar topics that you can find on Amazon also. amazon.com/Eucharistic-Miracles-Phenomena-Lives-Saints/dp/0895553031
May God bless you both!

TBH I don’t feel like paying money lol.

I have reasons to be a Catholic for now that don’t include particularly validating any miracle.

However, it is particularly nice to note the most noteworthy

That being said any one of these miracles from the article I posted by itself has little credibility to a non beleiver and no amout of faith is going to undo my understanding of that.

I can totally understand how “was said 500yrs ago” just doesn’t quite fly with an atheist.

3 seperate instances 2 eucharistic miracles and the shroud matching DNA spanning 2000 yrs is an atheist worthy miracle and one that if ignored when proven says alot about the person.

Unfortunately as of this moment my internet skills led me to find this not being provable…

Also as I argued a bit with another fellow on miracles I don’t fully trust, I foolishly forgot to fact check and these 3 in combination were the kind I like… now taken away

However mentioned before whether through mental defect or divine intervention I have miracles and I find following God to do me no diservice. So I don’t require these proofs to do my thing, but it would be nice in this such a convo if there was one

 

[Little_Tiger]

TBH I don’t feel like paying money lol.

I have reasons to be a Catholic for now that don’t include particularly validating any miracle.

However, it is particularly nice to note the most noteworthy

That being said any one of these miracles from the article I posted by itself has little credibility to a non beleiver and no amout of faith is going to undo my understanding of that.

I can totally understand how “was said 500yrs ago” just doesn’t quite fly with an atheist.

3 seperate instances 2 eucharistic miracles and the shroud matching DNA spanning 2000 yrs is an atheist worthy miracle and one that if ignored when proven says alot about the person.

Unfortunately as of this moment my internet skills led me to find this not being provable…

Also as I argued a bit with another fellow on miracles I don’t fully trust, I foolishly forgot to fact check and these 3 in combination were the kind I like… now taken away

However mentioned before whether through mental defect or divine intervention I have miracles and I find following God to do me no diservice. So I don’t require these proofs to do my thing, but it would be nice in this such a convo if there was one

Oh, alright, well I suppose that’s understandable lol. There’s one of the disadvantages of communicating with persons solely through the internet - if I knew you personally, I would buy the book for you.
Perhaps they’d have it in a nearby library. It certainly is an atheist worthy miracle. And since the article on ChurchMilitant supplies us with the recorded testimony of the formerly atheistic doctor who investigated the phenomenon, I see that we have proof. Also, it should be considered that the only alternative to the reports of the article being true is that we have a Catholic conspiracy, a grand lie in which the name of Dr. Zugibe has even been used falsely. Regardless, we would do well to investigate the book mentioned above (if it can be found in a library) since it documents Church approved miracles, and provides the reader with sources/documentation.
Also, I would very much advise looking here- therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/engl_mir.htm
We see the Vatican’s own exhibition of proven, approved Eucharistic miracles. The site has them set up by country. We should of course consider that this is published by the Vatican, and if one knows the Church’s extreme strictness and carefulness in investigating allegedly miraculous phenomena, one will not doubt the veracity of the accounts of scientific investigation recorded herein.
May God bless you my friend! Have a good day!

 

[PumpkinCookie]

Oh, it wasn’t an analogy PC.

Take it on its own merit: IF you really believe that you should believe in something because it makes you happy and good, then you shouldn’t have a problem with your adult, sane, right-thinking daughter believing in Santa because it makes her happy and good.

Truth matters.

You’re right, truth does matter!

A belief in Santa may “work” without being true of course. We have all kinds of beliefs like this, especially in science, social science, psychology, and religion. Simple fact is, we just don’t know the truth about everything, so we form beliefs based on experience that seem to work. Once they stop working, it can motivate us to find new beliefs that work better. It’s fairly simple to explain why the Santa theory is incorrect, and easy to explain how those presents actually got under the tree. It would concern me if my adult daughter believed the Santa theory since there is so much good evidence and solid reasoning to refute it.

I don’t believe there is as solid of a case, based on evidence and reason, to refute the various versions of Christianity. And so, I don’t conclude that people who believe in it are mentally deficient or seriously deluded. But, because I do believe it isn’t the best explanation, I’m here discussing these things with you right now!

Another poster brought up atomic theory. It is entirely possible that atomic theory is totally wrong and not true. However, it works well enough to allow us to understand a variety of phenomena, make accurate predictions, and build nuclear power plants. At some point, scientists could show that it is a deficient theory by means of experimentation and reasoning. In fact, a scientist who achieved that would problem win an award. Similarly, Catholicism allows some people to live good lives and some cultures to flourish. It’s also possible that it is totally wrong, so maybe the Catholic Church should spend some resources testing it and seeing whether there might be religious doctrines that are more true than what they currently believe, you know, like scientists and philosophers do.

Do religious organizations give awards to those who upend traditional notions and beliefs? Like for instance, if you were to come up with a new theory of matter that explained the universe better and allowed us to make better predictions about the behavior of nature, you’d be famous and get a huge award. If a priest were to refute transubstantiation for instance, and come up with a better explanation, would he win a huge award?

 

[LethalMouse]

Oh, alright, well I suppose that’s understandable lol. There’s one of the disadvantages of communicating with persons solely through the internet - if I knew you personally, I would buy the book for you.
Perhaps they’d have it in a nearby library. It certainly is an atheist worthy miracle. And since the article on ChurchMilitant supplies us with the recorded testimony of the formerly atheistic doctor who investigated the phenomenon, I see that we have proof. Also, it should be considered that the only alternative to the reports of the article being true is that we have a Catholic conspiracy, a grand lie in which the name of Dr. Zugibe has even been used falsely. Regardless, we would do well to investigate the book mentioned above (if it can be found in a library) since it documents Church approved miracles, and provides the reader with sources/documentation.
Also, I would very much advise looking here- therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/engl_mir.htm
We see the Vatican’s own exhibition of proven, approved Eucharistic miracles. The site has them set up by country. We should of course consider that this is published by the Vatican, and if one knows the Church’s extreme strictness and carefulness in investigating allegedly miraculous phenomena, one will not doubt the veracity of the accounts of scientific investigation recorded herein.
May God bless you my friend! Have a good day!

Idk, there is nothing to say this site you posted has vatican authority. And such

There should be something solid somewhere that shows what aspects of the random internet articles are actually approved by the Vatican…

I am having a hard time figuring that out

I am ever reminded of Catechism.cc which seems very legit but is in fact the writing of some random dude.

 

[Little_Tiger]

Idk, there is nothing to say this site you posted has vatican authority. And such

There should be something solid somewhere that shows what aspects of the random internet articles are actually approved by the Vatican…

I am having a hard time figuring that out

I am ever reminded of Catechism.cc which seems very legit but is in fact the writing of some random dude.

Oh, I’m sorry, the website itself doesn’t have any Vatican authority. The website is simply providing us with an online version of the Vatican’s book, which is available here - amazon.com/Eucharistic-Miracles-Catalogue-International-Exhibition/dp/1931101027
I’m not suggesting you buy it, since it is available at least in part from the website I linked you to.

 

[Little_Tiger]

As you can see when you open the link to the website, the Vatican’s book is authored by The (Most Rev.) Raymond Leo Burke, D.D., J.C.D.,
Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, former Archbishop of Saint Louis.
May God bless you!

 

[MPat]

As for your other example, it was specifically looking at the numbers that made me wanna heave, not the complexity of it. I was very good in math but never enjoyed it, and always link it with the mean ol’ calculus teacher I had in high school who terrorized the students.
So seeing those numbers jammed together took me back. Ugh.

And…I didn’t say I didn’t understand those proofs. I said they gave me a migraine. Two very different things.
(And I was joking about the migraine, btw)

Oh, in that case, sorry about a misunderstanding.

Nope. I don’t mean that.
I was very simply saying that if a person gets a bad grade from a professor, it doesn’t mean the prof is trying to “punish” them or that it is “punishment”.

Don’t be afraid.

Wow. That has been your personal experience? That professors “make exams difficult to pass and then punish students for failing”?
That’s terrible.

I can only go by what I saw with my father, who was a teacher, and my experience as a student; I’ve never found it difficult to pass an exam.
So if any of my teachers/professors were trying on purpose to make an exam too difficult to pass, it didn’t affect me and I didn’t notice because I passed it anyway.

Very good! You got pretty close to the reaction of a Catholic to what you wrote.

So I guess my “complete lack of understanding of how the educational system really functions” didn’t have any negative effect on me.

It couldn’t have: the part that is missing concerns how bad students deal with their studies.

So, let’s look at your claims in a more detailed way:

Wow. That has been your personal experience? That professors “make exams difficult to pass and then punish students for failing”?
That’s terrible.

The exams are meant to be easy for good students and hard for bad students. And when bad students get a failing grade, it does feel like a punishment. And, in a sense, it is.

Likewise, believing in God, miracles or something else supernatural is not hard (otherwise we wouldn’t have a vast majority of humanity succeeding in this task). Generally, it is hard for the ones who make it hard (by wanting that God didn’t exist etc.). Do you think that God should be willing to stay with the ones who did so much even to avoid believing that he exists…? For that matter, would you be willing to, let’s say, share a room with someone who tries to act as if you didn’t exist?

And yes, there is also invincible ignorance. I guess you know what Catholic Church teaches about it?

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 doesn’t have to try and convince the student to come to class.

Good students are there because they want to learn. Bad students are there for many other reasons (because they want to get a diploma, because parents sent them there etc.). And compulsory education is not exactly unheard of. And students skipping lectures are also not exactly unheard of…

If you do not believe me, look at, let’s say, undergroundthomist.org/frequently-asked-questions - and try to explain questions like “Does the professor care about absences?”…

They don’t have to report it and* believe *it. Just like Josephus’s untampered paragraph, someone would report it even to say that this is what people were believing. In the way a historian reports something.

But we already know that Christians believed in Christ’s resurrection - Christian sources should be completely sufficient for that. What would having reports from non-Christians add?

So, if reports from non-Christian are going to be either impossible (in case when they would report something that should result in conversion) or useless (in case when they report what we know anyway), why are you demanding for them, instead of investigating the evidence that exists?

Um, no. I think the evidence for all religions is pretty weak. Some worse than others.
I have no idea where you are getting that I want to pretend such a thing.

Let’s look at the “post-ancestor”:

As another poster said…don’t other religious scriptures also claim miraculous moments witnessed by people as well? If the Christian miracles are true, those can be true, too.
Didn’t Appollonios of Tyana perform miracles and appear to at least one of his followers after death?

So, you try to get from “Christian miracles are true.” to “Non-Christian miracles are true.”. As you can see, one premise is missing - probably something like “Evidence for non-Christian miracles is just as good as for the Christian miracles.”. And yet it is a premise that is obviously false (although not as obviously when it is left unstated), as you have confirmed.

Oh, and, by the way, we do not have to reject non-Catholic and non-Christian miracles. We have more options.

 

[LethalMouse]

As you can see when you open the link to the website, the Vatican’s book is authored by The (Most Rev.) Raymond Leo Burke, D.D., J.C.D.,
Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, former Archbishop of Saint Louis.
May God bless you!

Ah!! Okay cool.

And it does lend authority to the one miracle but makes none of the dna claims in the random internet articles found before. Definitely noteworthy but without the DNA connection I can see someone like Pumpkin not accepting even the Argentina one.

 

[Little_Tiger]

Ah!! Okay cool.

And it does lend authority to the one miracle but makes none of the dna claims in the random internet articles found before. Definitely noteworthy but without the DNA connection I can see someone like Pumpkin not accepting even the Argentina one.

Cool indeed my friend .
Yes, certainly. Oh, hm, you think so? That would be a shame, as the science confirms the miracle’s reality (what I mean is, the DNA connection shouldn’t be considered a necessity by skeptics if scientists have confirmed that a Host really did transform into living heart tissue).
I’m glad you took a look! We owe the Vatican a huge thanks for publishing such a great book.
God bless you, and be well and safe my friend!

 

[PRmerger]

PRM! Force to resort to an ad hominem attack?
Sorry to have driven you to this!

Oh, wow. What’s with all the exclamation points? Please simmer down, dearest.

Did you see the part where I said that I didn’t object to your posting style?

All I’m saying is that it’s pretty obvious that if one only engages superficially, it’s hard to critically examine the other side’s position.

“I’ve been here on the CAFs and I’m still an atheist!” is not something that is surprising, given that being a hit and run poster is leaven for, well, keeping oneself entrenched in one’s positions.

Does that not seem to be a logical and reasoned position I am espousing?

Hmmm. I’ve just posted about 30 posts on this thread, answering in detail and deep discussion all the questions I saw posed to me.

Have you ever heard some of those ridiculous Climate Change denier arguments? These wags look at the thermometer and say, “Hey, it’s 23 degrees outside. Yeah. Global Warming. Not”.



It’s such an impotent (and eye-roll inducing) argument, isn’t it? The entire modus of scrutinizing Climate Change isn’t based on a 2 week examination of the earth’s temperatures. Rather, it’s a look at the earth’s temperatures over centuries…millenia, even. We look at trends, not how the earth has done over 2 weeks in order to prove Climate Change false, right?

So to say, “Hey, I’ve posted 30 posts” over the past 2 weeks (or so) isn’t exactly an accurate picture of your previous and continued pattern.

If I don’t answer a question, it’s usually because I haven’t seen it or I don’t have time to,

Well…yeah. Pretty much.

since my work hours are 16-18 hours a day and I often have leave a thread and get back to work.

No one needs to apologize for working and living a real life, luv.

I noticed you posted on approx 8 different threads in the last 10 days and I’ve posted on 9. So if I’m peripatetic, then you are, too!

Did you know that Tu Quoque is the weakest form of refutation?

 

[PRmerger]

PRM! Force to resort to an ad hominem attack?
Sorry to have driven you to this!

Hmmm. I’ve just posted about 30 posts on this thread, answering in detail and deep discussion all the questions I saw posed to me.

If I don’t answer a question, it’s usually because I haven’t seen it or I don’t have time to, since my work hours are 16-18 hours a day and I often have leave a thread and get back to work.

I noticed you posted on approx 8 different threads in the last 10 days and I’ve posted on 9. So if I’m peripatetic, then you are, too!


.

Incidentally, I posted something in response to a question you posed on Christopher Hitchens.

Did you see my response?

How are they different morally?

.

Well, if this quote attributed to Christopher is true, (and it certainly sounds like his characteristic wit and humor), one of them used his organs to blaspheme, and was quite proud of it.

http://i.quoteaddicts.com/media/q3/813820.png

And let me provide a disclaimer: I think it is absolutely vile that any Christian would assert that God cursed Hitchens with cancer.

 

[PRmerger]

You’re right, truth does matter!

A belief in Santa may “work” without being true of course.

So the question is: let’s say this “works” for your adult daughter.

Would you encourage her to continue in this belief of Santa, since it works for her?

 

[PRmerger]

No, I didn’t see it.

Egg-zactly.

QED.

But let’s carry on, shall we?

(Except I might not respond to your posts because…busy.)

 

[lax16]

Hi PumpkinCookie and LethalMouse -
You guys might wish to check out this book for detailed information on different Eucharistic miracles. The same author has written other good books as well on similar topics that you can find on Amazon also. amazon.com/Eucharistic-Miracles-Phenomena-Lives-Saints/dp/0895553031
May God bless you both!

You can answer the question posed in this thread but don’t expect a response from the OP.

 

[PraiseChrist]

1. Test the blood samples against each other and see if they’re the same DNA. If they’re the same, across hundreds of years, that would be impressive.
2. There are only so many sins (thank God). Cold-reading, guessing, coincidence. Shout out enough people’s sins and you’re bound to get them right sometimes. Confirmation bias. Has someone recorded all the instances where Padre Pio failed to guess someone’s sins, or guessed the wrong ones?

I get what you mean by number 2. Watch this youtube video about St. Pio (since it’s an hour long, if you want to watch the time in the video from 14:15 to 17:53, that is a pretty important part)
youtube.com/watch?v=UbgXRODiT04

 

[PraiseChrist]

Another (now funny video) on the Divine Existence. Skip to 4:22 and 2:47 before watching the whole 21 min video

youtube.com/watch?v=nTcsndih9Ms&feature=youtu.be&t=2m49s

 

[Little_Tiger]

You can answer the question posed in this thread but don’t expect a response from the OP.

Well, I can be optimistic and hope he is checking out the sources I recommended. We must hope that people are open to the truth - as Tim Staples said, there is more to this than being convinced intellectually; the will can be a huge barrier to the discovery of truth. Though God has supplied us with innumerable proofs of the truth of His Church, not everyone wants the truth to be as it is.
And I must remember that it isn’t all about dialogue - prayer is needed, too. So, ultimately, I would put it like this: we must offer our brothers and sisters the proof that Catholicism is true, and we must pray that they open their minds and remain unrestricted by bias in the search for truth.
May God bless you my friend, have a good day!

 

[Lion_IRC]

Lion IRC;14112886:

DaddyGirl;14110086:

…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?

…yes, a specific* type *of rational. In this case, the non-theist kind!

Hmmm.

Help me out here.

Premise - Spokesperson for the group says members of the Rational Rat Pack are non-theists.
Premise - PRmerger is a member of the Rational Rat Pack
Conclusion - Therefore…??

Think Lion THINK!