Does the miracle of the dancing sun violate the law of non-contradiction?

  • Thread starter Thread starter WannabeSaint
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

WannabeSaint

Guest
A thing cant be and not be at the same time.

During the miracle of the dancing sun, only people in Fatima and neighboring areas saw the miracle. The sun was normal everywhere else on the planet.

So wouldn’t that mean the sun was dancing and not dancing at the same time…thus violating the law of non-contradiction?
 
Last edited:
WannabeSaint said:
A thing cant be and not be at the same time.
Click to expand...
You left out a part.

Aristotle states it: “It is that the same attribute cannot both belong and not belong to the same subject at the same time and in the same respect; and let us stipulate any other qualifications that have to be laid down to meet dialectical difficulties.” (https://dhspriory.org/thomas/Metaphysics4.htm#6).
WannabeSaint said:
During the miracle of the dancing sun, only people in Fatima and neighboring areas saw the miracle. The sun was normal everywhere else on the planet.

So wouldn’t that mean the sun was dancing and not dancing at the same time…thus violating the law of non-contradiction?
Click to expand...
The sun was dancing and not dancing at the same time, but not in the same respect.

Or, to be more precise, the sun was seen to be dancing and not dancing at the same time, but not in the same respect.

We do not seem to have any revelation claiming that sun itself moved, as opposed to, let’s say, its rays being miraculously curved to create such an impression.
 
Last edited:
Or the sun could have danced, and it was the rest of the world that got a false impression by God bending light to make things look normal.

Or there could have been physical apparitions of heat and light, and supernatural visions for everybody in the entire European area, possibly of the angel of the Sun instead of the actual solar body. One of the old ideas was that big deal angels watched over the Sun, the planets, and the stars personally, like their guardian or ruling angel; and that they could take forms that looked and acted like the celestial body they were guarding. Cherubim are supposed to be able to put out a lot of heat, for example.

There were no local alterations of gravity, which suggests that the whole thing is to be taken as a sign warning of the possibility of eternal wrath, rather than as a stellar event. But God can bend gravity too, if He feels like it, so I’m not particularly worried about the hows. The important thing about a sign is the why, and the message.

There are probably several other ways that the Miracle of the Sun could have happened without contradicting God’s normal laws of nature, or the way nature and the Sun was observed to work in other parts of the Earth. God is the master of Creation.
 
Last edited:
Nope.

God created the whole cosmos out of nothing. He can make the sun dance.

Deacon Christopher
 
Why would God have to make the sun dance? He just had to make the people believe they did. And apparenty lots of people thought that’s what they saw.
 
What do you make of it? What is your explanation of such phenomena? Just curious.
 
Atmospheric and/or meteorological optics combined with an ignorance that these things are natural plus a desire to see what one would like to see plus Chinese whispers, exageration and sensationalist reports, expectations, wish fullfillment, gullibility, willfull distortion of the truth, group psychology…I could go on but that’s enough to ponder.

Or, the sun actually bounced around. Pick the more likely.
 
It is rather peculiar that an object weighing two octillion tons can be so agile. But it gives the rest of us some hope.
 
I don’t believe that the sun actually bounced up and down, but to reduce this even just to a meteorological event isn’t right either.
 
Bradskii said:
Atmospheric and/or meteorological optics combined with an ignorance that these things are natural
Click to expand...
Rather obliging of the atmospheric and/or meteorological optics to show up on 13th October 1917, precisely as predicted by the seers, in a sufficiently dramatic fashion so as to baffle c60,000 observers.
 
I think I’ll remain skeptical. You think within 60,000 folks not one of them had ever had the experience you just described and wouldn’t understand what was going on? That explanation is basically as miraculous as the event itself lol.
 
Zaccheus said:
40.png
Bradskii:
Or, the sun actually bounced around. Pick the more likely.
Click to expand...
Or by God’s will the sun was made to seem to bounce around.
Bradskii said:
But maybe the sun really danced and Mary did appear, transformed from a fence post
Click to expand...
Disagree with us if you will: don’t actively mock. It’s bad form.
Click to expand...
That’s not mocking. Very many people actually did (and still do) think that a fence post was a representation of Mary. I can guarantee I could get more verbatum quotes from people who believe it happened and were actually were there then you would ever find from Fatima. People who would swear on a stack of bibles that they actually say the Virgin Mary.

Could you tell me why you’d believe one based on a few second hand reports and not one with many contemporary claims from people you could actually talk to?
 
catholicray said:
I think I’ll remain skeptical. You think within 60,000 folks not one of them had ever had the experience you just described and wouldn’t understand what was going on? That explanation is basically as miraculous as the event itself lol.
Click to expand...
See above. Why not believe contemporaty reports from very many people who you could actually talk to?
 
Bradskii said:
Nuff said.

People see what they want to see
Click to expand...
Indeed, Bradskii and similarly, don’t see what they don’t want to see. You’ll have to do a lot better than ‘everyone was half-blind from staring at the sun’ to explain Fátima.

A reductive comparison to a little-known purported Australian apparition coupled to an ad hominem doesn’t serve you well.
 
Finn said:
40.png
Bradskii:
Nuff said.

People see what they want to see
Click to expand...
Indeed, Bradskii and similarly, don’t see what they don’t want to see. You’ll have to do a lot better than ‘everyone was half-blind from staring at the sun’ to explain Fátima.

A reductive comparison to a little-known purported Australian apparition coupled to an ad hominem doesn’t serve you well.
Click to expand...
Why ‘purported’? It actually happened. ‘Little known’ is irrelevant. A miracle is a miracle. Unless you want to suggest that the better known ones are more likely to be true because of that fact. In which case miracles become more believeable the more that people hear about it.

And no-one said that everyone was half blinded. Just the one who was reported to have made that quote. It might be interesting to see how many first hand quotes we could find from Fatima and how many we could find from a ‘little known’ miracle in a Sydney suburb.

Could you tell me what makes you doubt witness claims in Sydney and reported claims in Fatima?
 
Just to be clear I didn’t request your opinion to attack it. I appreciate you sharing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top