How spiritual reality can affect physical reality and stays undetected?

  • Thread starter Thread starter STT
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
midori said:
“Beyond the veil” is a phrase that originated in the Bible. Because it refers to-- the Veil that separates the Holy of Holies from the rest of the Temple, and eventually evolved into a phrase meaning to show the separation between the ordinary and material, and the holy and the unknown.
Click to expand...
May I suggest that the “Veil” concept has nothing to do with the meaning of the Temple veil at all - especially since God tore it open, Jesus did not Ascend there and the Sadducees (who do not believe in an afterlife) were largely in control of the Temple.

Your use of the word “curtain” above does seem remarkably like what the book I linked to below describes…loosley fitted to a Christian audience.

I would be interested in any authoritative sources you have for your Temple Veil understanding.
 
Detected by what? The spiritual reality can be inferred from the world around us and from our experience and knowledge. It’s only after the fact that we have an intellect that we can know of spiritual realities. A chipmunk for example does not know spiritual realities because he can not grasp such realities. It is only us who have a rational soul that can grasp such higher order realities. Our intellect itself points to an immaterial reality by virtue of the fact that an immaterial mind is needed to think immaterial abstract thoughts. And having an immaterial intellect points to an immaterial cause of that mind. Since nothing in nature could cause it even in principle.

Is man’s intellect a freak of nature or the divine image? Man is a kind of poltergeist compared to the animal. If an alien intelligence came to earth would he see man as another animal that found greener pastures or as the cow that jumped over the moon? One must either accept man as a miracle or accept there is no explanation at all.
 
Last edited:
Benadam said:
they are… divided by sin. Some more than others.
Click to expand...
Thats an interesting approach.
I would say that is was caused by Adam’s personal sin but the effect (loss of integration between the soul and the body) is not truly “sin” in itself. It is an “evil” caused by sin of our forebears in the past.

That is more a Protestant leaning - where, for example, concupiscence is considered “sin” but Catholics do not - it is rather the “stubble” of sin.

So I don’t think we can strictly say “some more than others” as we are all the same in that boat - except Mary and Jesus of course.
 
Last edited:
STT said:
Even in case of Fatima some saw things and many didn’t see anything. How do you explain that something is visible to some and not to other?
Click to expand...
It was a supernatural event caused by God so God could cause some people to see it and others not. If the event was a supernatural vision, than it is easy to explain why some may have seen it and others not. If the event was a miracle of nature, than the explanation is more complex but really boils down to the causality of God which the world and everything in it relies on every second for its existence as well as the infinite power of God.
 
Not sure what you mean by “a miracle of nature”?

Do you mean a wonder of nature that cannot yet be explained by science?

The word “miracle”, at least by Catholic definition, tends to mean divine intervention in nature is assumed already.
 
By miracle of nature I mean the ‘miracle of the sun’ reported by many on that October day in 1917. It is reported that many saw the sun move and dance around, twirl, and fall towards them.
 
I realise that.
If you were trying to distinguish a wonder caused directly by God from a wonder, caused by the nature He created and holds in being, then likely best not to call the second a “miracle”.

Most religious and secular people do not understand miracles in your second sense but rather would still see direct divine agency at work which is not what you are trying to say I believe.

Oxford: Miracle…An extraordinary and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore attributed to a divine agency.

Cath Encyclop: in a specific sense, … wonders performed by supernatural power as signs of some special mission or gift and explicitly ascribed to God.
 
Last edited:
Even physical things have been undetected for thousands of years.
 
I am suggesting it is a basically an ancient pagan spiritual worldview (common in our daily non Christian culture) despite wearing some Protestant clothing.
That you cannot find any authoritative sources to demonstrate it is found in the Bible does seem to be somewhat telling.

Curses are common too!
 
Last edited:
You are mistaken. Source…numerous CAF discussions on this point with much historical sources provided if you care to search.
 
Last edited:
Thousands saw it. How do you explain those who didn’t.
 
And strangely it was sometimes Catholics who saw nothing and their non Catholic mates who did.
For example the photographer and journalist of a leading reporting newspaper of the day.
 
Last edited:
Have you heard of Our Lady of Zeitoun? In Egypt. Its amazing how many people of all denominations and also non believers who have witnessed these apparitions.
 
Richca said:
t was a supernatural event caused by God so God could cause some people to see it and others not. If the event was a supernatural vision, than it is easy to explain why some may have seen it and others not.
Click to expand...
َ And what is the explanation?
 
Roseeurekacross said:
Thousands saw it. How do you explain those who didn’t.
Click to expand...
The very fact that many didn’t see it indicates that motion of sun was a hallucination since all should have seen the motion of sun if it was physical.
 
Last edited:
STT said:
all should have seen the motion of sun if it was physical.
Click to expand...
Thats a somewhat premature assertion which could only be entertained by someone with a preset bias.

Nature is quite capable producing different effects across a broad spectrum of allegedly same individuals.

And who said the sun itself actually moved? Yes it seemed to move, quite the difference.
So a number of potentially feasible natural scenarios need to be assessed which you seem to exclude from the getgo by the above somewhat unjustified assertion.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top