M
- Status
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
non-believers never blaspheme.
this thread doesnt really prove anything. the so called miracles cant even be verified.
J
jimmy85
Guest
only if u dotn want to verify them, try to search more and to be more interesed about them, perhaps u would find something that could verify them.
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
i did what i could and its NOT even my homework!
J
jimmy85
Guest
lol, Well in my case I d like to travel to europe to make a pilgrimate to see the incorrupt saints. They are saints that their bodys didnt got discompoused after centuries of being deciced.i did what i could and its even my homework!
livingmiracles.net/Incorrupt.html
There are many saints like this, like: St Bernardete and, St Cura of Ars and others, so it is kind of interesting for me to make a pilgrimate to europe.
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
Check out Saint Yogananda…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramahansa_Yogananda#Claims_of_bodily_incorruptibility
Saint Dashi…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dashi-Dorzho_Itigilov
A
aristotle
Guest
Presumably both of these may have been Catholic through a baptism by desire.
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
youre stretching it, buddy.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
The Miracle at Lanciano proves to me that the early Church, the Catholic Church, believed in Transubstantiation. The early witnesses to Jesus, among whom were the Apostles, celebrated the Eucharist.youre stretching it, buddy.
But the following quote really wowed me, especially the quote from Wikipedia. How can you NOT believe this, or in Chrisitianity, when people who knew the EYEWITNESSES wrote this sort of thing. It’s exactly what our CC teaches today.
from New Advent.org
The combination “the Catholic Church” (the katholike ekklesia) is found for the first time in the letter of St. Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans, written about the year 110. The words run: “Wheresoever the bishop shall appear, there let the people be, even as where Jesus may be, there is the universal [katholike] Church.”
Wikipedia:
*History of usage
A letter written by Ignatius to Christians in Smyrna [1] around **106 ***is the earliest surviving witness to the use of the term “Catholic Church” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 8). By it Ignatius designated the Christian Church in its universal aspect, excluding heretics, such as those who disavow "the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ,which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again" (Smyrnaeans, 7). He called such people “beasts in the shape of men, whom you must not only not receive, but, if it be possible, not even meet with” (Smyrnaeans, 4). The term is also used in the Martyrdom of Polycarp in 155 and in the Muratorian fragment, about 177.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
AND, the following!! Nella, what do you think?
Wikipedia
St Cyril of Jerusalem (circa 315-386) urged those he was instructing in the Christian faith: “If ever thou art sojourning in cities, inquire not simply where the Lord’s House is (for the other sects of the profane also attempt to call their own dens houses of the Lord), nor merely where the Church is, but where is the Catholic Church. For this is the peculiar name of this Holy Church, the mother of us all, which is the spouse of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God” (Catechetical Lectures, XVIII, 26).[2]
The term “Catholic Christians” entered Roman Imperial law when Theodosius I, Emperor from 379 to 395, reserved that name for adherents of "that religion which was delivered to the Romans by the divine Apostle Peter, as it has been preserved by faithful tradition and which is now professed by the Pontiff (Pope) Damasus and by Peter, Bishop of Alexandria …as for the others, since in our judgement they are foolish madmen, we decree that they shall be branded with the ignominious name of heretics, and shall not presume to give their conventicles the name of churches." This law of 27 February 380 was included in Book 16 of the Codex Theodosianus.[3] It established Catholic Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire.
Hmm. Pope Benedict was right all along. We just keep reinventing the wheel.
Wikipedia
St Cyril of Jerusalem (circa 315-386) urged those he was instructing in the Christian faith: “If ever thou art sojourning in cities, inquire not simply where the Lord’s House is (for the other sects of the profane also attempt to call their own dens houses of the Lord), nor merely where the Church is, but where is the Catholic Church. For this is the peculiar name of this Holy Church, the mother of us all, which is the spouse of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God” (Catechetical Lectures, XVIII, 26).[2]
The term “Catholic Christians” entered Roman Imperial law when Theodosius I, Emperor from 379 to 395, reserved that name for adherents of "that religion which was delivered to the Romans by the divine Apostle Peter, as it has been preserved by faithful tradition and which is now professed by the Pontiff (Pope) Damasus and by Peter, Bishop of Alexandria …as for the others, since in our judgement they are foolish madmen, we decree that they shall be branded with the ignominious name of heretics, and shall not presume to give their conventicles the name of churches." This law of 27 February 380 was included in Book 16 of the Codex Theodosianus.[3] It established Catholic Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire.
Hmm. Pope Benedict was right all along. We just keep reinventing the wheel.
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
that supposed ‘miracle’ happened in the 8th century.
how do those prove the validity of believing in jesus?
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
Yes, as early as the 8th century, Catholics believed in Transubstantiation. Probably earlier, like mayber the Last Supper?
Eye witness accounts carry a lot of weight for some people.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
The point is, even if it was not a miracle, that maybe somebody swapped it out, (your theory) Transubstantiation was believed in by Catholics.
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
eye witnesses according to the friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of the supposed eye witnesses. i cant trust that. i find the chainy ‘pass the message’ not too reliable.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
Nope, a friend of a friend. The first eyewitness wrote it down (the Evangelists), Irenaeous knew the first eyewitnesses.eye witnesses according to the friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of the supposed eye witnesses. i cant trust that. i find the chainy ‘pass the message’ not too reliable.
A friend of a friend of a friend told me about Julius Caesar, Albert Einstein, etc. Should I believe them?
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
I would certainly believe that there was a Julius Ceasar, but not if somebody starts saying that Julius Ceasar shoots fireballs from his mouth. Similarly I believe the was a Jesus, a Peter, a Paul, but not the part that they are able to defy the laws of Nature. Now about St Ignatius, did he ever say that he saw the apostles make miracles? And wikipedia says a lot of his works: “the original letters had been changed with interpolations, created to posthumously enlist Ignatius as an unwitting witness in theological disputes of that age” This kind of corruption in the chaotic early days of christianity is exactly why i find written stuff from that era difficult to believe with enough certainty.
J
jimmy85
Guest
Bro lolyoure stretching it, buddy.
let me tell u My best friend is a Buddhist and I knew already that there was a buddhist monk that was foudn incorrupt in Russia. Now I dotn see why would this debunk christinity this peopel both cahtolics and non catholics had a remarkable life of great compasion and love.I would advice you to look for miracles liek this ones; how often do they happen n how many times.
and to find info aobut the person in order to prove that thier lifes were not normal but rather mystical.
That bring us to the point that God is with every human being and not with peopel f jsut oen religion. However this dosent mean that there is not one “Truth”.
there are several religions that by their good will and love follow the path of catholicism.
In my opinion I know that the religions that have more miracles are the catholic and the hinduist.
The CC is very strict and extremly skeptic in apporving miracles of saints.
In order for soemone to be proclaim a saint, he has to do a miracle, without it he cannot be called a saint, n u can check the list of saints that we have, people with remarkable lifes that have interceded in many miracles.
bottom line what u said about incorrupts that were non catholics , is not an argument for the plurality of religion but for the existens of God and of “one truth” that is universal to every person in every culture.
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
I believe in God. Those incurruptibles are really amazing, but there are scientific explanations to them. Besides, if corruptibles are really miracles, what does it mean that other religions have them? That they are just as true as catholicism?
M
Mag_Uidhir
Guest
The point of Lanciano is the Priest like you doubted Transubstantiation, so one time while saying Mass God removed his doubts, when the Host turned to flesh in his hands and I think dripped into the Chalice, believe it or believe it not.eye witnesses according to the friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of the supposed eye witnesses. i cant trust that. i find the chainy ‘pass the message’ not too reliable.
Even Jesus had people around Him that didn’t believe, it will be no different for us, there is none so blind as those that will not see.
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
The Monk fell for the fast one, the old switcheroo.
Magic/Miracle aint real. There is only the Magic Trick.
- Status