You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Protestants: What Are Your Thoughts About The Eucharist Miracles?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
A
Aslan10
Guest
Ya know, I find it very interesting honestly. But at the same time if this is to be considered “evidence” than you have to take into account miracle accounts in all other faiths. Its why i don’t tend to put much stock into it. Just as the Orthodox could ask about the miracle of light every easter that happens at the sepulchre. There are so many miraculous claims that I wouldn’t know where to draw the line as truth and not truth.
M
masuwerte
Guest
I have no problem at all believing that Jesus Christ is truly present in the sacrament of the eucharist. As I’ve come to know more Catholics, I’m surprised that many seem to have trouble with this belief. Reading the link, I wonder about the scientific rigor with which the miracle was investigated, but that doesn’t affect my belief.
T
TheFixer
Guest
I like the video Science Tests Faith very much, which is a full length presentation of the Buenos Aires Eucharistic miracle (Archbishop Bergoglio…) and the statue which proved to cry and bleed…blind DNA test results were astounding. My Protestant friends have had no comment, but I, too, would like to know what they think. As a Catholic, I don’t need this proof, I have Jesus’ own words that the bread IS his flesh and the wine IS his blood; nonetheless, I find Eucharistic miracles absolutely beautiful and joyful and I am grateful to God for such mysteries! (I’m sure they proseltyze many.)
PRAISE the LIVING GOD!!
PRAISE the LIVING GOD!!
T
Traverse
Guest
Eucharistic miracles get lumped in with all sorts of supposed miracles that people try to show off. I have no reason to assume the particular miracle featured in the video is fake, but no real reason to believe the words of the man speaking either.
So much is a hoax these days it’s hard to fully trust that a person isn’t telling a tall tale or even that the person received a specimen for study that wasn’t actually from the original host. This is not to mention that even demons can show off power, so if I were to believe that something supernatural occurred I would then have to be sure of the source of the supernatural event.
The subject of eucharistic miracles is actually what got me to investigate the catholic church more closely though, for what it’s worth. I certainly find them fascinating and while I’ve never seen any of these official lab reports that are supposed to have been done, it’s neat that a report is even claimed to have existed. In many other miraculous claims you get people keeping it very close to the chest and not allowing an attempt at verification.
I’ll echo what masu said, though. You get miraculous claims all over, not just in the catholic church. So while it’s a phenomenon worth investigating and not, in my opinion, outright dismissing, it’s not something that lends credence to Catholicism so much as credence to the fact miracles still happen today.
So much is a hoax these days it’s hard to fully trust that a person isn’t telling a tall tale or even that the person received a specimen for study that wasn’t actually from the original host. This is not to mention that even demons can show off power, so if I were to believe that something supernatural occurred I would then have to be sure of the source of the supernatural event.
The subject of eucharistic miracles is actually what got me to investigate the catholic church more closely though, for what it’s worth. I certainly find them fascinating and while I’ve never seen any of these official lab reports that are supposed to have been done, it’s neat that a report is even claimed to have existed. In many other miraculous claims you get people keeping it very close to the chest and not allowing an attempt at verification.
I’ll echo what masu said, though. You get miraculous claims all over, not just in the catholic church. So while it’s a phenomenon worth investigating and not, in my opinion, outright dismissing, it’s not something that lends credence to Catholicism so much as credence to the fact miracles still happen today.
H
House_Harkonnen
Guest
I don’t necessarily disbelieve in them. But they aren’t compelling enough for me to consider leaving my beloved Lutheran confessions for Catholicism or even Orthodox (which also claims many Eucharistic miracles.)
They are frankly not that important to me. And I find most of them to be…tawdry. Bleeding hosts, and that one about the host becoming a chunk of heart tissue.
I am not convinced these are anything more than stories made to tickle the ears and such.
A
Augustine3
Guest
What about the miracle of Lanciano? That miracle happen twelve centuries ago. It’s impossible for flesh to remain without decomposition for over 1200 years. We simply do not have the technology to preserve it let alone preserve it from the 8th century?I am not convinced these are anything more than stories made to tickle the ears and such.
H
House_Harkonnen
Guest
All the tests simply show its flesh, there is no evidence that its 1200 year old flesh, nor that its Jesus’s flesh.What about the miracle of Lanciano? That miracle happen twelve centuries ago. It’s impossible for flesh to remain without decomposition for over 1200 years. We simply do not have the technology to preserve it let alone preserve it from the 8th century?
That would be easy to prove, a simple DNA test of the flesh would show hat the flesh belongs to a human man without a father. If confirmed it would blast everything modern science knows genetics and DNA to smithereens. If confirmed it would hard, near impossible to dismiss.
DNA test wouldn’t have been used in 1971 during the last investigation. I think the church should allow a modern investigation of the supposed miracle. But I can think of a few reasons why they wouldn’t.
A
Augustine3
Guest
There has been a recent DNA test. The results were astounding. The blood has no DNA composition which defies modern science. Several individual tests were conducted to identify the DNA. All results came back with no trace of a DNA. This means no one can simply give a blood as an attempt to fraud this claim because everyone has a DNA.All the tests simply show its flesh, there is no evidence that its 1200 year old flesh, nor that its Jesus’s flesh.
That would be easy to prove, a simple DNA test of the flesh would show hat the flesh belongs to a human man without a father. If confirmed it would blast everything modern science knows genetics and DNA to smithereens. If confirmed it would hard, near impossible to dismiss.
DNA test wouldn’t have been used in 1971 during the last investigation. I think the church should allow a modern investigation of the supposed miracle. But I can think of a few reasons why they wouldn’t.
Furthermore, we have testimonials dating hundreds of years ago describing this miraculous Eucharist including details of when it was removed, where the bishop of the time placed it for a time interval, when and where it was sealed and so on. If you’re not willing to accept these documents then you can’t prove to me either if the bible is more than 100 years old.
H
House_Harkonnen
Guest
There has been a recent DNA test. The results were astounding. The blood has no DNA composition which defies modern science. Several individual tests were conducted to identify the DNA. All results came back with no trace of a DNA. This means no one can simply give a blood as an attempt to fraud this claim because everyone has a DNA.
Furthermore, we have testimonials dating hundreds of years ago describing this miraculous Eucharist including details of when it was removed, where the bishop of the time placed it for a time interval, when and where it was sealed and so on. If you’re not willing to accept these documents then you can’t prove to me either if the bible is more than 100 years old.
I doubt that’s true, but I would be willing to read scientific studies regarding the DNAless blood.There has been a recent DNA test. The results were astounding. The blood has no DNA composition which defies modern science. Several individual tests were conducted to identify the DNA. All results came back with no trace of a DNA. This means no one can simply give a blood as an attempt to fraud this claim because everyone has a DNA.
The earliest accounts IIRC were from the 1500s, hundreds of years after the supposed miracle. Why no contemporary sources for the miracle?Furthermore, we have testimonials dating hundreds of years ago describing this miraculous Eucharist including details of when it was removed, where the bishop of the time placed it for a time interval, when and where it was sealed and so on. If you’re not willing to accept these documents then you can’t prove to me either if the bible is more than 100 years old.
The NT, OTOH has many contemporary sources that are within 50 years of its authorship.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.