E
estesbob
Guest
So the only miracles that “count” are regrowing lost limbs?
*
“Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.”*
John 20:24
Billions of people have HD video cameras in their pockets: why aren't we seeing lots of miracles on video?
- Status
*
“Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.”*
John 20:24
P
PRmerger
Guest
That’s like saying to the woman you courted: if you could show me, without a shadow of a doubt, that you will never cheat on me, THEN I will propose to you.
No woman, even if had this power, would accept a proposal like that. Nope. She wants you to put your faith in her, to take a chance on her.
God, too, is a gentleman, and will never take you up on that challenge. It’s a boorish provocation.
If you want to court God in relationship, then take a leap into the light.
P
PumpkinCookie
Guest
No no, that’s not how this works. You see, God needs to court us. If he wants our trust, then he needs to be the one to make the proposal. God is the man in this scenario.
The problem is, I’ve never heard from him directly. I’ve got lots of suitors and people propositioning me constantly. They come to my door with pamphlets. They erect billboards and host radio programs and write books. They all claim to be God’s designated representatives. They claim to know all about God and have the exclusively correct information about who he is and how this relationship is going to work.
So, which suitor really represents God? Which one is telling the truth? I think, none of them. However, if the Catholic suitors want me to accept their proposal, they need to demonstrate that they’re telling the truth about God. A miracle on video like the one described above would leave no doubt. It would cause a world-wide conversion to Catholicism. Wouldn’t that be a good thing, in your eyes?
P
PRmerger
Guest
No.
You are the person seeking.
If you want assurance, then you are like the man demanding that his Beloved prove to him that she will never cheat. “Can you show me that you’re never going to cheat?”
She’s not going to do that.
Because she knows that’s the exact WRONG QUESTION to be asking.
P
PumpkinCookie
Guest
So, are you saying God is passive and feminine? Coy and shy, too bashful to come out in the open to endorse her official spokesmen?
What happened to the skull-cracking, earth-flooding God? Columns of fire, bears eating children, seas splitting in half, plagues, thunder, burning bushes, manna, etc? That doesn’t seem bashful and feminine at all!
I’m not seeking assurance of God’s existence. I’m trying to find out if the people who claim to be his official and exclusive “vicars” are frauds or not. One simple miracle would put down any further controversy. Surely this is within the power of the omnipotent Creator. He is creating the universe out of nothing. He can make a leg grow back.
L
Little_Tiger
Guest
Hello,
Oh, my apologies if I misinterpreted your words. It seemed to be clear sarcasm. My mistake.
I must ask - if you accept that truth can be found in books, why do you refuse to believe unless you see miracles on video? Is the testimony of hundreds upon hundreds of medical professionals (often non-believers) insufficient proof?
As to the challenge, where are our miracles, they are here - pamphlets.org.au/docs/cts/australia/html/acts1518.html
Here - catholicpamphlets.net/pamphlets/THE%20MIRACLES%20AT%20LOURDES.pdf
And particularly here-
amazon.com/Miracle-Lourdes-Ruth-Cranston/dp/0385241879
The last link is to the book I have frequently recommended throughout the thread, which is authored by a Protestant journalist. I most highly recommend it. You may also wish to try The Healing Fire of Christ by Fr. Paul Glynn, which is available from Ignatius Press and other sellers online.
Yes, you are absolutely correct that truth can be found in reason, science, etc…faith in fact is subsequent to the examination by human reason of the reasons to believe the Catholic Faith is true.
Regarding Gemma di Giorgi, the girl born without pupils, she was in fact examined by numerous doctors and still lived with us at the time of the blog post (and hopefully remains with us today). Here you go, just scroll down to where it says “Healings” (although I suggest reading the whole page) - catholic.com/blog/tim-staples/miracles-and-evangelism
Furthermore on her: youtu.be/kp9TgyjlnS0
padrepiodevotions.org/pray-hope-and-dont-worry-issue-11-april-june-2002/
amazon.com/Padre-Pio-Fransiscan-Friars-Immaculate/dp/1601140096
ucanews.com/story-archive/?post_name=/2003/03/28/visit-of-woman-healed-by-saint-padre-pio-inspires-many&post_id=22215
thepathlesstaken7.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-most-amazing-case-of-padre-pios.html
Furthermore, you are absolutely correct that a miracle is not simply something that is unexplained or unlikely. This article defines a miracle - karlobroussard.com/what-constitutes-a-miracle/
L
Little_Tiger
Guest
The Church does not simply declare something a miracle if it is unexplained - it can only be declared a miracle by the Catholic Church if *medical/scientific professionals determine it to be absolutely beyond the powers of nature, including some unknown natural causation. *You may also wish to see this page - ewtn.com/johnpaul2/cause/process.asp
As far as impossibilities, Lourdes is filled: a broken bone, with substantial bone missing in between, miraculously fusing together. A man with a hole in his skull having the metal plate there present disappearing, with new bone in its place. A girl with no pupils being able to see. A woman with ulcerous caverns in her face suddenly receiving new skin upon her contact with Lourdes water. And so on and so forth.
In conclusion, I could be wrong, but I see what might be a contradiction in your acknowledgement that truth can be found in books and websites (in this case, from the testimony of unbelievers, medical professionals, Protestants, etc…) and the fact that you will not accept a miracle as definitive unless you see a video recording of it.
May God bless you my friend! Be well and safe!
As far as impossibilities, Lourdes is filled: a broken bone, with substantial bone missing in between, miraculously fusing together. A man with a hole in his skull having the metal plate there present disappearing, with new bone in its place. A girl with no pupils being able to see. A woman with ulcerous caverns in her face suddenly receiving new skin upon her contact with Lourdes water. And so on and so forth.
In conclusion, I could be wrong, but I see what might be a contradiction in your acknowledgement that truth can be found in books and websites (in this case, from the testimony of unbelievers, medical professionals, Protestants, etc…) and the fact that you will not accept a miracle as definitive unless you see a video recording of it.
May God bless you my friend! Be well and safe!
P
PRmerger
Guest
Stop it.
God is never going to show you with 100% certainty of his existence.
He wants you to take a leap of faith.
Just like your lover would.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Yep. And there was one simple miracle.
And yet it wasn’t enough to convince everyone.
Speaks volumes, doesn’t it, about the recusance of folks?
I am 100% certain that it’s not “I want a miracle to show me that God exists” which is holding you back–but an emotional one.
P
PumpkinCookie
Guest
I am already convinced of God’s existence.
I just don’t believe any of the people who claim to be God’s official spokesmen.
One miracle like I described above, and all heresy, all other religions, atheism, etc would disappear. Isn’t that what you want?
P
PRmerger
Guest
Based on what?I am already convinced of God’s existence.
So, again, a miracle wouldn’t convince you.I just don’t believe any of the people who claim to be God’s official spokesmen.
It’s an emotional recusance. Not an intellectual one.
This is a statement that has been proven false by history, reason and logic.
There is no greater miracle than a dead man rising, and yet that still hasn’t removed all “heresy, all other religions, atheism, etc”.
L
Little_Tiger
Guest
Hello,
In fact, He has. Check out the First Cause Proof- peterkreeft.com/topics/first-cause.htm
It demonstrates the existence of God, using the word demonstrate in the strict philosophical sense of the word.
Also check out - strangenotions.com/how-to-perfectly-know-the-existence-of-god/
Also, you may want to try Aquinas (A Beginner’s Guide) by Dr. Edward Feser, former atheist.
Faith in God, as well as Catholic faith, is entirely grounded in human reason.
God bless you my friend!
P
PumpkinCookie
Guest
Problem: only a handful of people claim to have witnessed these miracles 2,000 years ago. The ancient literature of humanity reports fantastic miracles all over the place, and yet you reject them as fact (so do I). I believe we reject these things because they seem unlikely, and the texts are not reliable reports about reality.
An HD video can of course be manipulated. But, what if a small crowd witnessed the miracle I described, and recorded it from different angles? It would be difficult to deny the facts of the matter in that case!
NO, you repeatedly misunderstand. I believe God exists. I don’t believe the Catholic Church speaks with the voice of God. I think they’re mistaken, and I need a miracle to prove to me they aren’t.
P
PRmerger
Guest
That’s not 100% certainty, LT.
Those are arguments which state: it’s more likely than not likely that God exists.
But definitely not 100% certainty.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Let’s make it clear that when we are talking about God, in this context, we are talking about the Triune God. The divinity of Christ.
E
e_c
Guest
Read the Lives of the Saints and have a nice time. I would particularly recommend the Trochu biography of John Vianney - it is relatively recent, in the Western world, contains numerous stories (which are just selected samples), and was researched meticulously in the context of enormous publicity while the people involved were mostly still alive, or their children testified for them.
Canonizations start with skepticism.
In any event, I’ve noticed people are oddly obsessed with limb regrowth. Not only has this happened before (Our Lady of the Pillar, pray for us!), but it is just plain uninteresting compared to resuscitation of the dead and the resurrection of oneself from the dead.
Also, Scripture deals with this problem, such as in the verse I quoted before (1 Samuel 3:1, which indicates that there were times during the Judges in which miracles and visions were few and far between)… There is also today’s passage from the Office of Readings. You might recall a parallel to this in the Gospels:
From Isaiah 6…
8 Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”
9 He said, “Go and tell this people:
“‘Be ever hearing, but never understanding;
be ever seeing, but never perceiving.’
10 Make the heart of this people calloused;
make their ears dull
and close their eyes
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts,
and turn and be healed.”
11 Then I said, “For how long, Lord?”
And he answered:
“Until the cities lie ruined
and without inhabitant,
until the houses are left deserted
and the fields ruined and ravaged,
12 until the Lord has sent everyone far away
and the land is utterly forsaken.
13 And though a tenth remains in the land,
it will again be laid waste.
But as the terebinth and oak
leave stumps when they are cut down,
so the holy seed will be the stump in the land.”
The lesson seems to be that God does not owe us His overt manifestation, and, in fact, we deserve punishment instead, for all manner of reasons. Sometimes He chooses one way, sometimes another. We aren’t to inquire into these things (and in fact, Augustine claims this is the one question off-limits to theology!)…
Also relevant is the 2nd temptation of Christ. Why did He not fly around Jerusalem like the Devil wanted? It would have been much easier than the Cross…
It’s not about a New Rome. It’s about a New Jerusalem, where glory is secret and hidden in pain and furthered by love.
P
PRmerger
Guest
I don’t believe the Catholic Church speaks with the voice of God. I think they’re mistaken, and I need a miracle to prove to me they aren’t.
I think this is because someone in the CC hurt your feelings, and your emotional reaction has so colored your ability be a disinterested judge.
I will offer you this thought. Again. God, if he exists, is not going to be the God who proposes the same ideas you propose.
If your idea of God is one and the same as your own ideas…then you have reasoned yourself into believing in the God of the Almighty Self.
P
PumpkinCookie
Guest
Yes I realize that is your assessment of me, that’s great. None of us are ever disinterested judges. We are both rational and animal, it’s not possible to escape our natures and become totally either.
To respond to your earlier post, no, something like the trinity is not accessible to reason, and that’s not the God in which I believe. It depends entirely on the testimony of people who have offered no evidence to suggest their special insight into God’s nature. Now, if one of them would perform a miracle while invoking the trinity and claiming the miracle to be evidence of God’s endorsement of the RCC, that would be convincing.
You’ve offered this thought before, but it doesn’t seem to make any more sense. Why don’t you start a new thread about that and we’ll pull it apart and examine it?
E
e_c
Guest
Let me recommend once more the Lives of the Saints, both Butler’s and the assorted collection of biographies, autobiographies, etc.
You are not asking for the moon.
- Status