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

  • Thread starter Thread starter PumpkinCookie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not gonna read the whole thread again, but i’m pretty sure this video has been linked earlier.

Second of all, that poster, pumpkincookie, is Mensa-level smart, so I’m not sure talking to him like he’s an ignorant is a great idea, not to mention it’s not very respectful. Look Jesus did wondrous stuff, performed amazing miracles, and he said that his followers would do even greater things, and I think pumpkincookie wants to see those things. He wants to see an aids patient being healed instantly, a severely malnourished African child with a bloated abdomen and skin disorder be healthy in one split of a second, as Jesus clearly promised. He wants clear, straightforward, unequivocal, irrefutable, not 3rd rate stuff open to theories and interpretations.
There is a link to that video earlier in this thread. Admittedly, it’s an odd occurrence deserving of some investigation for sure! I can think of some explanations that aren’t miraculous, but I can’t really say one way or another what really happened.

No worries, I’m not offended. One thing I enjoy about the internet is people’s enthusiastic participation and lack of hesitation. I rarely take offense in my day-to-day interactions with others and am almost never offended by statements directed toward me on the internet. Life is too short and the questions are too numerous to waste time being butthurt.

You’re exactly right: let’s have some unambiguous miracles. The examples you gave would all be acceptable.
 
There is a link to that video earlier in this thread. Admittedly, it’s an odd occurrence deserving of some investigation for sure! I can think of some explanations that aren’t miraculous, but I can’t really say one way or another what really happened.

No worries, I’m not offended. One thing I enjoy about the internet is people’s enthusiastic participation and lack of hesitation. I rarely take offense in my day-to-day interactions with others and am almost never offended by statements directed toward me on the internet. Life is too short and the questions are too numerous to waste time being butthurt.

You’re exactly right: let’s have some unambiguous miracles. The examples you gave would all be acceptable.
Why do you think that this would be convincing, if the resurrection of Christ wasn’t enough to convince folks?
 
Why do you think that this would be convincing, if the resurrection of Christ wasn’t enough to convince folks?
The “resurrection” of Jesus was convincing: but only to people who believed they witnessed Jesus dying, staying dead, and then miraculously appearing to them. Imagine the bloodshed, confusion, strife, war, torture, destruction, and chaos that could have been prevented if he stuck around longer. He could have appeared to the Sanhedrin who condemned him. He could have appeared to Pilate to convince him of the truth. He could have guided the development of Christian doctrine and avoided centuries of strife, disagreement, heresy, and schism. Imagine if he were still here: thousands of years old and miraculously able to heal others and teleport himself from place to place. The possibilities are endless!

A genuine miracle in the here and now is worth more than all of the miracles recorded in dusty old books put together, in my opinion. It worked for Thomas, why wouldn’t it work for millions of us?
 
Where I was coming from is, people still suffer whether or not you look away.
Beautiful thoughts are like alcohol. After getting drunk on beautiful thoughts, all the problems are still there.
-]Incantations/-] prayers over computer listings are like alcohol. After getting drunk on confirmation bias, all the problems are still there.
Christ didn’t call us to live in Disneyland. Christ said be child-like, not childish. That’s where I was coming from ;).
Faith is action.
Action includes building our dialogue with God.

The family visited Disneyland twice.
My kids loved it as much as their parents.
I agree; it’s a nice place to visit, but I wouldn’t want to live there.
 
The “resurrection” of Jesus was convincing: but only to people who believed they witnessed Jesus dying, staying dead, and then miraculously appearing to them. Imagine the bloodshed, confusion, strife, war, torture, destruction, and chaos that could have been prevented if he stuck around longer. He could have appeared to the Sanhedrin who condemned him. He could have appeared to Pilate to convince him of the truth. He could have guided the development of Christian doctrine and avoided centuries of strife, disagreement, heresy, and schism. Imagine if he were still here: thousands of years old and miraculously able to heal others and teleport himself from place to place. The possibilities are endless!

A genuine miracle in the here and now is worth more than all of the miracles recorded in dusty old books put together, in my opinion. It worked for Thomas, why wouldn’t it work for millions of us?
I think your idea of God is distorted. Those of the Sanhedrin were not on a different planet. They were right there but perhaps saw things in a manner not dissimilar from your own, believing God to be Power rather than Love.

Giving of ourselves is what heaven is all about. It is through acts of charity that we gain transcendence. God is to be found in our relationships with others and through prayer, the sacraments and contemplation of our connection with Him to be found revealed in scripture and our conscience.
 
Here it comes…the smilie that I rarely use…:rolleyes:

Discussions about a poster’s “Mensa-level” intelligence notwithstanding, are you asserting that if someone had merely “average smarts”, it would be permissible to talk to him “like he’s an ignorant”?
Of course not. But asking say, a Mensa member if he’s familiar with Google is kinda silly, though.
Not gonna happen. Sorry.

That, of course, isn’t proof that God doesn’t exist, or that Christianity is false, is it?
It isn’t. Something can be objectively true, and it doesn’t cease to be true whether I believe it’s true or not. But I think pumpkincookie made amply clear that while he believes in a God, he would like, just like Thomas roughly 2000 years ago, to have evidence that Christ is God, and by extension, that the Catholic Church is THE Church, not a Church.
 
I think your idea of God is distorted. Those of the Sanhedrin were not on a different planet. They were right there but perhaps saw things in a manner not dissimilar from your own, believing God to be Power rather than Love.

Giving of ourselves is what heaven is all about. It is through acts of charity that we gain transcendence. God is to be found in our relationships with others and through prayer, the sacraments and contemplation of our connection with Him to be found revealed in scripture and our conscience.
Thomas was probably too cartesian to believe in Christ’s resurrection, whereas for most of the Sanhedrin, believing in Christ’s resurrection would have entailed a radical change of life and the loss of power, prestige and the pride that comes with being the official judges of everyone’s actions and words. In closing, It’s hard to read Church documents down the centuries, read the writings of saints down the centuries, read about different approved divine manifestations (apparitions and whatnot), process the whole thing and then form a coherent, cohesive view of what the Church is all about. if I say, based on the writings of many saints and the very words of Jesus, that the larger part of humankind will end up in eternal damnation, would you consider my view distorted? If so, why? And if so, quote me one saint, just one, who said otherwise (i.e. that the greater part of the human race will be saved)?

And if most end up lost eternally, then that’s a massive (if not decisive) blow against God’s attribute of omnibenevolence. You can’t allow the eternal suffering/torture/torment of billions of human beings and still get to be called all-good. In light of what I just said, would you say my view of God as a non omnibenevolent being is distorted?
 
Of course not. But asking say, a Mensa member if he’s familiar with Google is kinda silly, though.
I don’t think it’s silly at all.

Some of the smartest Mensa-level people are quite lacking in so many abilities.

In fact, I’d bet that there are some super-smart people you know personally that have
  1. not been able to grasp a very simple concept (say…how to use Google)
  2. made a complete mess of their lives either because they thought they were superior to other folks intellectually or because they lacked grit
  3. failed at their intellectual pursuits and have no advanced degree
  4. embraced some really, really asinine ideas that even a child would know simply couldn’t be true
 
I don’t think it’s silly at all.

Some of the smartest Mensa-level people are quite lacking in so many abilities.

In fact, I’d bet that there are some super-smart people you know personally that have
  1. not been able to grasp a very simple concept (say…how to use Google)
  2. made a complete mess of their lives either because they thought they were superior to other folks intellectually or because they lacked grit
  3. failed at their intellectual pursuits and have no advanced degree
  4. embraced some really, really asinine ideas that even a child would know simply couldn’t be true
Maybe. That does boggle the mind. How can very smart people become scientologists would be another example. You just have to look at Hubbard or listen to an interview of him to know he’s a fraud. But since the Internet has been around for about 20 years, that Pumpkincookie lives in an affluent, technologically advanced society, that he’s been on this forum for years, there is no way he’s not familiar with search engines, let alone Google.
So, your point is well taken. Kinda.😛 Now let’s let this thread follow its course.
 
It isn’t. Something can be objectively true, and it doesn’t cease to be true whether I believe it’s true or not. But I think pumpkincookie made amply clear that while he believes in a God, he would like, just like Thomas roughly 2000 years ago, to have evidence that Christ is God, and by extension, that the Catholic Church is THE Church, not a Church.
So…let’s say a Catholic prayed for a cure for an AIDS patient, and…this AIDS patient was cured.

You are saying that this would be evidence that the Catholic Church is THE Church?

That doesn’t seem to be the logical conclusion, but is that what you’re proposing (that PC is proposing?)
 
The “resurrection” of Jesus was convincing: but only to people who believed they witnessed Jesus dying, staying dead, and then miraculously appearing to them.
Errr…no.

He was only able to convince a handful of people

Most of them saw and were adamantine: God can not become Man.
 
The “resurrection” of Jesus was convincing: but only to people who believed they witnessed Jesus dying, staying dead, and then miraculously appearing to them. Imagine the bloodshed, confusion, strife, war, torture, destruction, and chaos that could have been prevented if he stuck around longer. He could have appeared to the Sanhedrin who condemned him. He could have appeared to Pilate to convince him of the truth. He could have guided the development of Christian doctrine and avoided centuries of strife, disagreement, heresy, and schism. Imagine if he were still here: thousands of years old and miraculously able to heal others and teleport himself from place to place. The possibilities are endless!

A genuine miracle in the here and now is worth more than all of the miracles recorded in dusty old books put together, in my opinion. It worked for Thomas, why wouldn’t it work for millions of us?
It does but we’re not always aware of the effects. There is plenty of evidence for the power of positive thinking whereas inanimate things cannot deliberately alter the course of events; they are merely cogs in the machine of nature.
 
One has to wonder why it takes the Vatican ages to make a definitive statement on that hoax.
This is a curious comment.

I’m quite sure that the objection, “The Vatican decided way too quickly that it was a hoax” would be forthcoming too from some folks…

 
A genuine miracle in the here and now is worth more than all of the miracles recorded in dusty old books put together, in my opinion. It worked for Thomas, why wouldn’t it work for millions of us?
It wouldn’t work for “millions of us” because
  1. it didn’t work for the thousands who saw Him, literally, in the flesh
  2. human nature. For those who don’t want to believe, it’s amazing what they will espouse in order to deny God’s existence/Christianity/Catholicism.
One person (probably of Mensa-level intelligence) has argued that perhaps the answer to the empty tomb and the miracles of Jesus is: aliens did it.

Yep. Can you even? 🙂
 
The “resurrection” of Jesus was convincing: but only to people who believed they witnessed Jesus dying, staying dead, and then miraculously appearing to them. Imagine the bloodshed, confusion, strife, war, torture, destruction, and chaos that could have been prevented if he stuck around longer. He could have appeared to the Sanhedrin who condemned him. He could have appeared to Pilate to convince him of the truth. He could have guided the development of Christian doctrine and avoided centuries of strife, disagreement, heresy, and schism. Imagine if he were still here: thousands of years old and miraculously able to heal others and teleport himself from place to place. The possibilities are endless!

A genuine miracle in the here and now is worth more than all of the miracles recorded in dusty old books put together, in my opinion. It worked for Thomas, why wouldn’t it work for millions of us?
Oh, and God’s never going to give in to your demand for a “genuine miracle”.

Imagine if you were courting a woman and invited her to spend the rest of her life with you.

She responded with: nope. Not gonna do it until you can offer me some documentation that you love me. I want data Scientific data. And then I need documentation, hard, cold evidence, that you will never cheat on me. Then I will consent to marry you.

That would indicate a kind of obdurate spirit, no? Someone you really don’t want to court.

And let’s say, incredibly, that you were indeed able to provide the proof she demanded, would you then really even want to marry her? Would that really be love that she’s demonstrating as opposed to: I am 100% certain I’ll have a comfortable life with Pumpkin so therefore I’ll go with him, and not the other guy.

Nah.
 
Thomas was probably too cartesian to believe in Christ’s resurrection, whereas for most of the Sanhedrin, believing in Christ’s resurrection would have entailed a radical change of life and the loss of power, prestige and the pride that comes with being the official judges of everyone’s actions and words. In closing, It’s hard to read Church documents down the centuries, read the writings of saints down the centuries, read about different approved divine manifestations (apparitions and whatnot), process the whole thing and then form a coherent, cohesive view of what the Church is all about. if I say, based on the writings of many saints and the very words of Jesus, that the larger part of humankind will end up in eternal damnation, would you consider my view distorted? If so, why? And if so, quote me one saint, just one, who said otherwise (i.e. that the greater part of the human race will be saved)?

And if most end up lost eternally, then that’s a massive (if not decisive) blow against God’s attribute of omnibenevolence. You can’t allow the eternal suffering/torture/torment of billions of human beings and still get to be called all-good. In light of what I just said, would you say my view of God as a non omnibenevolent being is distorted?
You would do well to refer to the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

:twocents: from a random internet idiot.

God does not predestine anyone to go to hell and wants all to come to repentance. That said, there are those who willfully turn away from God until the end.

When we are dead we are dead, but the relationship with God that defines our timeless being remains. So It would boil down to the status of our relationship with God. There is no body to participate further in time and space. We are what we have done for all time. We, as one humanity, messed things up at the beginning of time and we can individually choose to repeat the same error having been given another chance.

We’re not talking about billions of people; it’s about you and me. Personally speaking, the log in my eye can distort what I see out there, so I’m not going to talk about them, but rather us. Fact is, for as much as I am me and how could such a terrible outcome happen to me, been there, done that, I seem to do what I know I shouldn’t and it always ends the same, suffering of some form or another. But time means that things change. When my time is up, what will be the outcome from which I cannot escape because it is who I am? Even St Paul, in today’s reading he says, “No, I drive my body and train it, for fear that, after having preached to others, I myself should be disqualified.” The measure is love of what we do and fail to do. Me, I can most definitely see myself in hell, and not because God lacks in benevolence. He did not put me there in those brief visits, it was what I did. And you, well if you choose not to care about me, what am I to do? If you the reader would choose to use and abuse me, i can ensure that the sin does not radiate forth from me, but the tragedy of having lost the possibility of a mutually loving relationship goes to the heart of our being. It is one of the pains we endure; we will be consoled. Again, this has nothing to do with God’s benevolence but the consequences of our own acts, the reward that comes with following whom we choose to be the master of our will.

Speaking generalities, we can’t say anyone is in hell, but it exists. There will be no need for HD evidence on one’s deathbed as one’s life is reviewed in the presence of infinite love and mercy. It may be that everyone is sorry for their acts against love. While we are equally loved by God, the things of this world are given us in accordance to His will. This means that different things are asked of us. At the end of our time, with all disappearing but the timeless moment that contains our entire life, will we ask for His mercy or find ourselves locked in frozen hardness of our hearts?

I’m just giving you my take on this, and given people’s responses, what I intend to say may not be what you understand. I would direct you to taking up your concerns with God Himself. The Catechism is a great resource.
 
Not gonna read the whole thread again, but i’m pretty sure this video has been linked earlier.

Second of all, that poster, pumpkincookie, is Mensa-level smart, so I’m not sure talking to him like he’s an ignorant is a great idea, not to mention it’s not very respectful. Look Jesus did wondrous stuff, performed amazing miracles, and he said that his followers would do even greater things, and I think pumpkincookie wants to see those things. He wants to see an aids patient being healed instantly, a severely malnourished African child with a bloated abdomen and skin disorder be healthy in one split of a second, as Jesus clearly promised. He wants clear, straightforward, unequivocal, irrefutable, not 3rd rate stuff open to theories and interpretations.
Using Advanced Search indicates the video has not been cited.

As for the OP and all those who require their own “backyard resurrection” to come to believe are like St. Thomas who was neither ignorant nor wise but lacked faith.

If one cannot use the simple CAF Advanced Search than one might not understand the google engine’s capability.
 
In closing, It’s hard to read Church documents down the centuries, read the writings of saints down the centuries, read about different approved divine manifestations (apparitions and whatnot), process the whole thing and then form a coherent, cohesive view of what the Church is all about.
Really?

This is a head-scratcher–someone can claim to be so very well read on Catholicism yet be unable to offer a “coherent, cohesive view of what the Church is all about”?

Given what I know of human nature, and of our intellect, I can only draw 2 conclusions from that:
  1. there is a peculiar obduracy that is being limned.
  2. the examination of Church documents, writings of the saints, etc has been very, very cursory
I think that most people who have examined the Church’s writings can come up with a cohesive picture of what “the Church is all about”.
if I say, based on the writings of many saints and the very words of Jesus, that the larger part of humankind will end up in eternal damnation, would you consider my view distorted? If so, why? And if so, quote me one saint, just one, who said otherwise (i.e. that the greater part of the human race will be saved)?
And if most end up lost eternally, then that’s a massive (if not decisive) blow against God’s attribute of omnibenevolence. You can’t allow the eternal suffering/torture/torment of billions of human beings and still get to be called all-good. In light of what I just said, would you say my view of God as a non omnibenevolent being is distorted?
I think God has done the smartest thing with our soteriology: given us enough hope that we can feel some confidence in our salvation, with just enough fear that we can say, “I may not be one of those saved”.

That’s a perfect combination, no?

You don’t want the OSAS lie to fool you, and you don’t want to be ruled by despondence either.

#Godisprettysmart
 
So…let’s say a Catholic prayed for a cure for an AIDS patient, and…this AIDS patient was cured.

You are saying that this would be evidence that the Catholic Church is THE Church?

That doesn’t seem to be the logical conclusion, but is that what you’re proposing (that PC is proposing?)
1 Kings 18:25
 
This is a curious comment.

I’m quite sure that the objection, “The Vatican decided way too quickly that it was a hoax” would be forthcoming too from some folks…
Could be. But how is that a problem if you know for a fact that it is a hoax? The Vatican is not about what is popular but what is true. At least that’s how it should be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top