Dont understand atheists

[Arkadin]

You may want to refresh your memory:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_Lanciano
therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html
miraclerosarymission.org/lanciano.html

Yes, this is true. The Church has not ruled on the Shroud.

Critical study is very important (and usually leads to the Truth).

You can’t link to a site that has a bias outlook on the subject. You need to link to things that reflect an unbiased approach to the eucharist “miracle”. The wiki article is lacking.

Why did they not test how old this flesh was? It also proves nothing other than that this is some flesh and some blood. No evidence to suggest it was previously wine or bread.

But, if you want to…check out this site. It’s commentary to the to Linoli paper by a cell molecular biologist.

arumanchan.blogspot.com/2008/08/eucharist-miracles-miracle-of-lanciano_12.html

 

[coolduude]

You can’t link to a site that has a bias outlook on the subject. You need to link to things that reflect an unbiased approach to the eucharist “miracle”. The wiki article is lacking.

Why did they not test how old this flesh was? It also proves nothing other than that this is some flesh and some blood. No evidence to suggest it was previously wine or bread.

But, if you want to…check out this site. It’s commentary to the to Linoli paper by a cell molecular biologist.

arumanchan.blogspot.com/2008/08/eucharist-miracles-miracle-of-lanciano_12.html

Wikipedia is not lacking. It had citations from legitimate sources.

How’s this source? mediafire.com/?2j2j8qalrmcrlb4:

If you can read Italian…

 

[Lui]

Just because the gospels try to make a point that Christ fulfills the prophecies of the old testament, doesn’t mean it really happened. .

Duh, the whole belief system of Christianity is based on believing it IS true.
I can only answer: just because an atheist believes in nothing, it doesn’t really mean it’s true.

 

[Soldier_Of_God]

But, if you want to…check out this site. It’s commentary to the to Linoli paper by a cell molecular biologist.

arumanchan.blogspot.com/2008/08/eucharist-miracles-miracle-of-lanciano_12.html

I doubt this virtually anonymous person’s analysis would be seriously considered scientifically definitive or even useful by any stretch. However, if you want to accredit this individual any unbiased credibility, by all means knock yourself out.

 

[Arkadin]

I doubt this virtually anonymous person’s analysis would be seriously considered scientifically definitive or even useful by any stretch. However, if you want to accredit this individual any unbiased credibility, by all means knock yourself out.

He’s not anonymous and is a cell molecular biologist, so he has some knowledge in this field. It is useful.

 

[Arkadin]

Indeed. The Shroud is very interesting. I don’t believe it is medieval but I’m not sure if it’s legitimate either.

Yeah, people are thinking it’s only 1,300 years old. If that is true, then it’s certainly not Jesus.

 

[Obsculta]

When I have been reading this thread I have been skipping the atheist arguments as they still install so much doubt in my mind

Fellow catholics and christians, what in your mind makes all these great atheist scientists wrong?

In case you have any doubt as to whether you are wrong to do so, I wish to say from a scriptural perspective you are well in your right to do so.

“Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things” Philippians 4:8

We should avoid pornography and near occasions of sin for similar reasons. This is entirely your decision of course, no one can tell you you must avoid reading about atheism under punishent of sin, but possibly with the help of a spiritual director or your confessor you can learn better what obstacles to avoid on your path to spiritual growth.

 

[PJM]

=catholicm17;8124881]After reading into atheism and christianity alot over the last few weeks, I dont understand how atheists believe what they believe.

OK, first of all nothing existed, nothing. Then out of nothing this beautiful vast universe, with huge planets, stars and galaxies was created.

Then again out of nothing sprang this unique planet called earth and once again out of nothing, life mystically evolved.

Out of nothing somehow became 2 self replicating molecules which somehow grew eyes, hearts, veins, skin and senses… LOL

I look at the human body and how complex it is(not to mention all of the birds, fish, reptiles etc). Even something as simple as a lymph node or a gland is complex, we get a cold or illness, the node swells up, traps the illness then destroys it, keeping us alive and healthy. Then we have consciousness, eyes, lungs and thoughts and feelings that somehow grew out of nothing.

We then move out of science onto religion. Look at all the stuff that has happened, the great story of Jesus, The Bible… OK you can deny that but it is then followed up by modern miracles and the great saints.

Really there has been too much amazing stuff that has happened for their to be no God surely? The existence of life is the greatest miracle of them all in my opinion! But then for Christianity to grow rapidly, saints to be produced and many miracles to happen…

surely its the atheists who are delusional, and not us believers as Dawkins would say.

My dear friend in Christ,

If you can keep a secret I feel the same way

The issue here is not reality; is not truth, is not ignorance; but an underlying perception that they know More and they know Better than the majority. Its a sort of denied Gnostics elitist federation because it makes ME feel SOOOOOOO Gooooood.

One can KNOW this because of they way they MUST choose to ignore the realities that surround us, and even the way we humanity are made different that every other living thing in the universe.

Just pray for them, and get on to something else.

God Bless,
Pat

 

[Soldier_Of_God]

He’s not anonymous and is a cell molecular biologist, so he has some knowledge in this field. It is useful.

He is virtually anonymous. Did you verify his credentials or is this an assumption on your part based on his blog statement? Also, having “some knowledge” (and being an admitted skeptic) in a field does not qualify someone to have useful knowledge on a specific matter they have not thoroughly investigated. Ironically, you are engaging in the same behaviour by those you have critiqued by providing links to materials to biased and suspect sources.

 

[Soldier_Of_God]

Yeah, people are thinking it’s only 1,300 years old. If that is true, then it’s certainly not Jesus.

Even if it was 2,000 years old, it doesn’t prove it’s Jesus. However, it does increase the likelihood to* possible* at that point.

 

[Arkadin]

Sadly, there is not much to find on the Eucharist “miracle” of Lanciano other than christian sites claiming its authenticity. Sadly, the link I provided may have a slight biased opinion on religion, but he does provide insightful arguments refuting this “miracle”. It also seems all arguments for this miracle stem from one person’s test back in the 70’s.

Why has there not been any studies on the age of this heart?

There is no evidence against the idea that they took a human heart and blood. People have agendas, even within the church.

Same goes for the Shroud, why have there not been more carbon dating tests? As for the material used in the testings back in the 80’s, did the church provide specific pieces of cloth or did the scientists choose what to test?

The weaving found on the shroud has not been able to be proven that this type of weaving was used during the time of Jesus (at least from my findings) and another shroud they found dating back to the 1st century goes against the Shroud of Turin in terms of weaving. I believe other forms of clothing have been found and none support the Shroud’s authenticity.

 

[Soldier_Of_God]

Sadly, there is not much to find on the Eucharist “miracle” of Lanciano other than christian sites claiming its authenticity. Sadly, the link I provided may have a slight biased opinion on religion, but he does provide insightful arguments refuting this “miracle”. It also seems all arguments for this miracle stem from one person’s test back in the 70’s.

Why has there not been any studies on the age of this heart?

There is no evidence against the idea that they took a human heart and blood. People have agendas, even within the church.

Same goes for the Shroud, why have there not been more carbon dating tests? As for the material used in the testings back in the 80’s, did the church provide specific pieces of cloth or did the scientists choose what to test?

The weaving found on the shroud has not been able to be proven that this type of weaving was used during the time of Jesus (at least from my findings) and another shroud they found dating back to the 1st century goes against the Shroud of Turin in terms of weaving. I believe other forms of clothing have been found and none support the Shroud’s authenticity.

All of your assertions are based on dated commentaries, misinformation and biased distortions that are typical of would-be “debunkers” and “skeptics” that come to this board. The actual research and analysis show a more complex and sophisticated positions for both sides. As for the Shroud, the latest view is that the weaving has been shown to been existant for the time period, unlike older pronouncements or conclusions. We may have taken your (name removed by moderator)ut more seriously if your agenda wasn’t so transparent and your written effort lax.

 

[samiam1611]

(Originally posted by me: “no no no. Why do you expect atheists to act differently if they truly believe there is no God?”)

Originally posted by babylonsfalling
<–I don’t…my experience with atheists is that they will make a lot of noise about not believing but never actually act that way.

I do not know what you mean. Act what way?

(Originally posted by me: “I am not conflicted AT ALL. (I do admit I could be wrong however - I want scientific proof, and I don’t have any. So I am technically an agnostic atheist.)”)

<—No such thing

Yes there is.

From that article : “If a man has failed to find any good reason for believing that there is a God, it is perfectly natural and rational that he should not believe that there is a God; and if so, he is an atheist… if he goes farther, and, after an investigation into the nature and reach of human knowledge, ending in the conclusion that the existence of God is incapable of proof, cease to believe in it on the ground that he cannot know it to be true, he is an agnostic and also an atheist – an agnostic atheist.”

One can also be an agnostic theist by the way.

(Orignally posted by me: “I cannot stress to you enough how non-conflicted I am.”)

<—You’re actually OVERSTRESSING the issue…though doth protest too much.

Uh okay well just stating my views. You said the exact opposite of how I feel so I thought I would try to clear that up.

(Originally posted by me: “I don’t try to not believe. My behavior is what it is! It has nothing to do with me being concerned that there is a chance that God is going to judge me when I die”)

<— Then why were YOU the one to bring it up. I never even mentioned judgment.

I know you did not bring up judgement; but I was not sure what you meant when you said atheists “never actually behaving as if God is a non existent. Their walk never matches their talk.” I just went with the assumption that you meant something along those lines. (which is why I added the caveat…“or whatever other reason you have for thinking that atheists must be conflicted since they don’t act like…”

(Originally posted by me: …what exactly do you think we would act like if our walk matched our talk? If I was a thief or a murderer, then would you believe me when I say I am not conflicted?")

<—More of the same…it’s YOU making this connection, not me. I never made any connection between atheism and bad behavior…that’s coming totally from you

See your sentence above: “never actually behaving as if God is a non existent.” I readily admit that I made an assumption that you were refering to moral behavior.

(Originally posted by me: “but basically I am just your average person who happens to lack belief”)

<—My keychain lacks belief, atheists have DIS-belief…there’s a difference, which amounts to rejection of God on the part of atheists. in anything supernatural.

Ye Olde…“I lack belief” is old and worn out. It’s an attempt at trying to naturalize atheism into some default position so that atheists can pretend they haven’t made an actual decision to try DIS-believing in God, or in other words reject Him.

Atheism is not as cut and dried as you seem to think it is. I suggest you read this before continuing:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism#Definitions_and_distinctions
There is implicit atheism vs explicit atheism, positive atheism vs negative atheism. Plus there is apatheism, nontheism, antitheism etc etc. Perhaps you are basing your views on the more outspoken atheists like Richard Dawkins. He does not represent all atheists. I am really getting the impression that you do not realize that there is actually a spectrum of atheism.

If you want to explain your statement about atheists’ behavior, I welcome you to do so. I made the assumption that you were referring to morality/good and bad behavior simply bc it is just such a common topic on the philosophy forums where I hang out the most and I could not think of anything else that you could have meant.

I think if you read that article (at least that section please) we may be able to make a little more headway instead of just correcting each other.

 

[Arkadin]

All of your assertions are based on dated commentaries, misinformation and biased distortions that are typical of would-be “debunkers” and “skeptics” that come to this board. The actual research and analysis show a more complex and sophisticated positions for both sides. As for the Shroud, the latest view is that the weaving has been shown to been existant for the time period, unlike older pronouncements or conclusions. We may have taken your (name removed by moderator)ut more seriously if your agenda wasn’t so transparent and your written effort lax.

Would you care to provide me links to the most up-to-date research on Lanciano and the “incorruptible” bodies?

 

[agnes_therese]

After reading into atheism and christianity alot over the last few weeks, I dont understand how atheists believe what they believe.

That’s OK, they don’t understand us, either.

 

[Arkadin]

I think a lot of atheist understand why someone would believe in a god or God, especially us former believers.

 

[Arkadin]

I didn’t talk about Fatima earlier when it was brought up to defend faith, but I will briefly talk about it.

For starters, no catholic needs to believe Fatima to be a miraculous event. I do not believe this was a miracle, but one of confusion and potential fraud or delusion. No one ever saw Mary except for the children and we can only take their word for it. Lucia’s mother did not believe her until after the supposed sun miracle.

Well, when you are staring at the sun for an extended period of time, it does strange things and can appear to be “dancing”. There is no evidence of anything truly happening. The photos are just of crowds and only one photo of a normal looking sun. A lot of people went there looking for something, so it is natural to “see” something.

I find it strange that most of the things we know of this event seem to come from a compiled report by a Catholic priest some many years later.

And what’s also strange about these three secrets (especially the second one) are that they were not revealed until much later. The second supposedly predicted World War II if people didn’t straighten up (strange God would allow such an atrocity), but what’s fascinating and telling is that this secret was not revealed until a few years after World War II started!

Everything we know comes from pro-miracle things and this so-called claim that the newspaper O Seculo was anti-clerical comes from pro-miracle sources. There is nothing but hearsay for this apparition.

I find it interesting how some people didn’t see anything.

The supposed accounts of witnesses away from the scene don’t hold up well since, from what I’m gathering, came from that priest’s book some many years later.

Fatima used to hold me to my former faith at one point, but upon critical study and researching, I find it to be dubious as can be.

 

[M31]

Don’t understand atheists, huh? Well, have you ever BEEN an atheist? If I were you and have NOT been an atheist, it would be best to not mock.

 

[samiam1611]

Don’t understand atheists, huh? Well, have you ever BEEN an atheist? If I were you and have NOT been an atheist, it would be best to not mock.

Amen!

 

[Soldier_Of_God]

Would you care to provide me links to the most up-to-date research on Lanciano and the “incorruptible” bodies?

How good is your Italian?