New Eucharistic Miracle with Video on French National Television

StMichael's picture

I have a link to a video here that some might find interesting. It is not approved by the Catholic Church but is being currently investigated. While an Italian bishop was saying Mass for the French television station that broadcasts Mass for shut-ins, the Host miraculously leviated off the paten on national television. The story had been under investigation for some time, and recently the bishop who was celebrating Mass wrote a book describing the miracle. Thankfully, the video was preserved for all to see. Here is the link to the video itself: http://www.tonyassante.com/miracolo/immagine%20rallentata.zip

I just want to reiterate that this miracle is not approved and is still under investigation, but I think it very probable as such.

Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom,
StMichael

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

Ivan_Ivanov's picture

Hardly impressive,

Hardly impressive, magicians can do much more effective tricks.

I wonder if he'd repeat this 'miracle' in front of James Randi.

Rook_Hawkins's picture

Indeed...and spoon bending

Indeed...and spoon bending is a better trick in my opinion.  Or be like David Copperfield and make the Statue of Liberty dissappear.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)

StMichael's picture

Except that what is on the

Except that what is on the video is no trick.

Randalllord's picture

StMichael said, "... but I

StMichael said, "... but I think it very probable as such."

 

You must have either spent to much time in seminary school and are unaware of how easy an illusion levitation is to perform or you have an emotional need to believe such things. In your case I suspect both cause you to believe this "miracle". Any magic store carries books and videos on how to do these tricks. Just a simple monofilament can levitate an object like the one in the above video. I suspect this is what was used as I notice that if wobbles around when first leviated which would be what one would expect with a monofilament.

 

Here are some video on how to levitate:

 Levitating an object with a monofilament

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbkQfWaNJgA

 

Chris Angel revealing how to levitate himself

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRMHmnr4b60 

 

David Copperfield levitation tricks revealed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGzIXcu4OZ8 

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca

StMichael's picture

Of course, even every

Of course, even every Catholic is free to be skeptical until the Holy See decides anything about it.

Needless to say, however, that nobody had an interest in rigging a miracle in this case. Further, it goes without saying that this would be sacrilege to manipulate the Sacred Host in this way.

Also, it does not seem to be fishing line at all. The motion of the host is rather odd in that it wobbles, but levitates straight up and without swerving, which is rather odd if it was being hoisted with a monofilament.

Oh, and to cite the article: "Poichè il filmato con queste immagini è abbastanza lungo e ricco di primi piani, si ha la possibilità di acquisire, con ragionevole certezza, che non si tratta assolutamente di illusione ottica o di inganno di prospettiva. Esperti del settore, dopo attento esame del filmato, hanno escluso nel modo assoluto una manipolazione tecnica delle immagini."
This basically says that the film association and some other folks reviewed the film before multiple experts in illusions and the like who all testified that such was not a fake.

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

Ivan_Ivanov's picture

StMichael wrote:Except

StMichael wrote:
Except that what is on the video is no trick.

Ungh... puh-lease!

How do you know? How could you tell wheter  magicians are just tricking you if they didn't explicitly say so?

David Copperfield could become a bishop instead of a proffesional magician, while still practicing magic as a hobby, and do the whole Statue of Liberty trick, but claim it was an actual miracle, and poor fools like you would yell 'Halleluyah'!

And try looking at it from a different perspecitve: is your god totally bored?

"Behold humans, I the creator of the world, the one that has made everything from the deepest depths of the oceans to the highest mountains, the creator of your sun and moon, all the stars and galaxies, the entire universe, shall make my power known to you: I shall make a paten levitate a quarter of an inch above a table!"

Come fucking on...

One more question: do you have any links to stories of this miracle in English? I actually want to send it to Randi.

Angelic_Atheist's picture

StMichael wrote:

StMichael wrote:
Of course, even every Catholic is free to be skeptical until the Holy See decides anything about it. Needless to say, however, that nobody had an interest in rigging a miracle in this case. Further, it goes without saying that this would be sacrilege to manipulate the Sacred Host in this way. Also, it does not seem to be fishing line at all. The motion of the host is rather odd in that it wobbles, but levitates straight up and without swerving, which is rather odd if it was being hoisted with a monofilament.


I thought you were were at least a little rational ... until I saw this.

I am ashamed I gave any credit to your so called rationality to begin with. How are we supposed to consider both sides when someone such as you posts such silly videos.

We must favor verifiable evidence over private feeling. Otherwise we leave ourselves vulnerable to those who would obscure the truth.
~ Richard Dawkins

StMichael's picture

Well, there is no obligation

Well, there is no obligation for Catholics to believe it. The position of the Church is always skepticism toward these things. However, it does not seem to have been disproven yet.

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

Ivan_Ivanov's picture

StMichael wrote: This

StMichael wrote:
This basically says that the film association and some other folks reviewed the film before multiple experts in illusions and the like who all testified that such was not a fake.

No one is disputing the authenticity of the film itself, but the film beeing authentic does in no way prohibit this bishop from doing the trick.

If I film a magician's performance the film will be authentic, but the cutting of the woman in half won't.

StMichael's picture

The point of that article

The point of that article was both that the film was undoctored and that experts in illusions on film attested that they could see no trick being performed.

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

Ivan_Ivanov's picture

StMichael wrote: The point

StMichael wrote:
The point of that article was both that the film was undoctored and that experts in illusions on film attested that they could see no trick being performed.

 

So what if they couldn't?

No one can actually see a trick beeing performed when a magician does it, if they saw it, no one would be entertained.

People know it's a trick only because magicians, unlike this bishop, have enough decency to inform the public that what they are doing is, in fact, nothing more then a trick.

And could you please explain, what the hell is the Creator Of All Existance trying to show by hovering a plate thingy less then an inch above a table?

StMichael's picture

I think the point of this

I think the point of this miracle, as with any miracle, is to provide evidence for people who do not believe that Revelation is correct. More specifically, to probably show the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. And it is not a thingy; it is a Host - a piece of bread which has been consecrated and become the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ, retaining only the appearance of bread.
Further, it is quite unlikely that the bishop has intentionally rigged this. First, because it is sacrilege. Second, because he has a good reputation which would be at stake. Third, because, as I said, there do not seem to be any evidence in the video that the Host is being supported by any mechanism.

Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom,
StMichael

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

Ivan_Ivanov's picture

StMichael wrote: I think

StMichael wrote:
I think the point of this miracle, as with any miracle, is to provide evidence for people who do not believe that Revelation is correct. More specifically, to probably show the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

Then why not do it in a less ambigous way?

A big flashing sign in the night sky:

"Yo bitches,

Revelation is correct, and more specifically, Christ is really present in the Eucharist.

 Cheers!

-God"

It would be much easier to understand, and much more believable then something that can be replicated by an amateur magician. 

Quote:
And it is not a thingy; it is a Host - a piece of bread which has been consecrated and become the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ, retaining only the appearance of bread.

No, it's a thingy.

You have yet to prove that any single aspect of your religion is true, so forgive me when I remain sceptical to your claim that this thingy is magically transformed into the body of someone who you have yet to prove ever existed. 

 

Quote:
Further, it is quite unlikely that the bishop has intentionally rigged this. First, because it is sacrilege. Second, because he has a good reputation which would be at stake.

Pedophilia is not only a crime, but also a sin, and a pretty serious one as far as I know, but it doesn't stop some priests from doing it 

Quote:
Third, because, as I said, there do not seem to be any evidence in the video that the Host is being supported by any mechanism.

 If you film any (good) magician, you will not see any mechanism, or any evidence that would show it's a trick, unless he will let you.

StMichael's picture

First, I think miracles make

First, I think miracles make quite clear the message in a much more dramatic way.
Second, I did not mean, though I admit it may sound like it, that you must accept my belief in the Real Presence. It does, however, have a proper name, which is a Host, which does not designate, in the term itself, any truth or falsity to my belief.
Third, the bishop in question has more to lose than a parish priest. So, any incentive against a parish priest is much more increased/multiplied with a famous Archbishop. It does not prove it with certainity, but it makes it quite unlikely.
Fourth, the people they consulted had experience with magicians on film. The Host had no sign of wires or any evidence that it would be a fake. Magicians do leave traces on film, such as wires or evidence that a portion of the trick was not visible, or that the sleight-of-hand is able to be dissected in stop-frames.

Also, of course, the bishop breaks and later consumes the Host at the end of Mass, so wires tied or fixed onto the Host are not a possibility.

Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom,
StMichael

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

If the thingy is some form

If the thingy is some form of bread that might explain why it wobles. If it stick on the plate some how it that would have caused wobbleing.

Quote:
Magicians do leave traces on film, such as wires or evidence that a portion of the trick was not visible, or that the sleight-of-hand is able to be dissected in stop-frames.


http://www.learnmagictricks.org/makeahummercardvideo.html

http://www.learnmagictricks.org/smallobjectlevitation.html

Here someone is even using magic tricks as a why to explain christian ideas. In this video the prist doesn't even wave his hand over the bread as illusionist can still do. I have also heard of a story of a christian playing a trick on an atheist trying to get him to believe.

Here a person offers a way to "make a bread roll float." "You know the floating silver ball? You don't need it because now you can do the exact same trick with any bun or bread roll. It is totally impromptu. And you will love the secret gimmick."

LeftofLarry's picture

StMichael wrote: I have a

StMichael wrote:
I have a link to a video here that some might find interesting. It is not approved by the Catholic Church but is being currently investigated. While an Italian bishop was saying Mass for the French television station that broadcasts Mass for shut-ins, the Host miraculously leviated off the paten on national television. The story had been under investigation for some time, and recently the bishop who was celebrating Mass wrote a book describing the miracle. Thankfully, the video was preserved for all to see. Here is the link to the video itself: http://www.tonyassante.com/miracolo/immagine%20rallentata.zip I just want to reiterate that this miracle is not approved and is still under investigation, but I think it very probable as such. Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom, StMichael

 

I was born and raised in Italy, I have seen the holy sites, I have been blessed by the most holy of preists, (thanks to grand donations from my mother, I think the money would have been better spent if it was given to me), I have seen these supposed "miracles" first hand.  They are a dime a dozen all over Italy.  It's the way the church keeps it's sheep in a mindless trance.  Dazzle wazzle magic tricks bro.  People who are predisposed to believe in god through years of conditioning and social stress, will buy into these "miracles".   The irony is that these "miracles" only happen in those places where people want to see them.  Ironically you never see the Madonna appear in Mecca and you don't see Mohammed appearances in the Vatican.  I wonder why that is?  hmmm... one would think that a god would want to be seen by those who doubt him the most?  I just find it very convenient that the miracles only happen to those who want to see them.  Where was the miracle of saving the thousands that died during Hurricane katrina?  

 

Even if this was true, and I don't in a million years believe it to be true, but for the sake of argument, even if it was true, why would I ever wanna worship a god who would rather perform silly levitation tricks instead of giving is the true miracle of stopping countless wars in his name or stopping hunger and disease for the millions around the world.  Why doesn't the miracle manifest itself in ridding the world of malaria?  Yeah..these silly little catholic tricks are nothign more than more propaganda.   

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.

LeftofLarry's picture

and another thing, the

and another thing, the reason why this is happening in France is simply political. France is becoming more and more secular, so the church is trying to gain it's foot hold back. 

It takes a bit more than a little magic trick to convince ratioanal people....that god exists.  And it's only mindless sheep who are dazzled by little plates hopping up from the table for a second or so.  I think some of the magicians here in the states do much more formidable tricks.  Penn and Teller...atheists, perform better tricks. 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.

StMichael's picture

Quote: I was born and

Quote:
I was born and raised in Italy, I have seen the holy sites, I have been blessed by the most holy of preists, (thanks to grand donations from my mother, I think the money would have been better spent if it was given to me), I have seen these supposed "miracles" first hand. They are a dime a dozen all over Italy.

Wonderful. That doesn't mean that they are thus false.

Quote:

It's the way the church keeps it's sheep in a mindless trance.

Of course, only if you start off with the assumption that they are both false and deceptive.

Quote:

Dazzle wazzle magic tricks bro. People who are predisposed to believe in god through years of conditioning and social stress, will buy into these "miracles".

Then why haven't the most eminent medical scientists disproved most of these miracles? Why are they still unexplainable? No magic tricks.

Quote:

The irony is that these "miracles" only happen in those places where people want to see them. Ironically you never see the Madonna appear in Mecca and you don't see Mohammed appearances in the Vatican. I wonder why that is?

Actually, I remember an apparition of the Blessed Virgin to Muslims being mentioned once. I'd have to go look it up. However, I do know that she has appeared to Hindus to effect conversions, in a famous instance at, I believe, Valiyapally. There are other examples of that, however.

Quote:
I just find it very convenient that the miracles only happen to those who want to see them.

The miracles in Italy and in the rest of the world are easily ascertainable by any believer or non-believer. Those that are permanent, like that at Lanciano, are easily investigatable.

Quote:
Where was the miracle of saving the thousands that died during Hurricane katrina?

God has often done things like this. However, I don't know. You'd have to ask Him. He allows certain bad things to happen for the greater good, in the end.

Quote:
why would I ever wanna worship a god who would rather perform silly levitation tricks instead of giving is the true miracle of stopping countless wars in his name or stopping hunger and disease for the millions around the world.

God allowed us to choose death rather than life. Miracles are His call for us to return to Him. If we had listened to God, no such wars would happen and no hunger/disease would exist.

I think also that the overwhelming number of these miracles is fairly compelling.

Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom,
StMichael

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

Randalllord's picture

I think the most surprising

I think the most surprising thing in the video was that the priests performed the ceremony with no expression of surprise or amazement at what was happening. This tells me they rehersed and expected it.

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca

StMichael's picture

Now come on. If the priests

Now come on. If the priests had rehearsed a dramatic event for national television to convince everyone that a eucharistic miracle had occurred, would it do well to pretend it wasn't happening? That is one good reason in my opinion that it is true. It was not terrifically dramatic and it was suppressed for years before it surfaced just recently.

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

Randalllord's picture

If a real miracle was

If a real miracle was occuring right in front of them you think they act if it's no big deal? Oh sure, these miracles occur all the time. Ho hum.

Laughing

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca

Brian37's picture

StMichael wrote: Well,

StMichael wrote:
Well, there is no obligation for Catholics to believe it. The position of the Church is always skepticism toward these things. However, it does not seem to have been disproven yet.

Magic is not real. You are desperate because of liking certain things cant see how easly fooled you are.

If I claimed I had a $1,000,000 and and got 1,000 people to make the claim that I had $1,000,000 and doctored a check book and made a phony bank statement you'd be gullible enough to buy it.

I think the wise person would say, "Ok Brian, I hear you claim you have that money. I hear other people claim you have that money. Now Brian, prove it, go to your bank and withdraw it"

What if I kept making excuses as to why I couldnt withdraw it?

This lack of questioning you your part allows you to buy claims of levitation and virgin births. 

Levitation is an illusion and virgin births are fiction. You want to believe people so bady whenever they make a claim you like that your brain shuts off. 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37

StMichael,  Took a look at

StMichael, 

Took a look at the video.

It looks like there were a line on each side of the plate and they were pulled out of sync - hence the wobble.

The lines on the sides of the plate also solves the problem of the priest taking some of the host - he took it from the middle to avoid the lines.

What really concerns me is the "I'm skeptical until the Pope says it's true" view that you hold. It leaves you way too open to be sold anything. All someone has to do is claim to represent the Pope and claim that he recieved a statement about X from him. then it becomes dogma to you because after all, the Pope has no reason to lie when speaking ex cathedra - indeed, it is impossible for him to do so (you believe). 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin

StMichael's picture

The Holy See finds a miracle

The Holy See finds a miracle credible, but does not obligate anyone to believe in a specific miracle. The Holy See does not define these as dogma, nor does it make sense to do so (they are not articles of faith!). He does have the ability to define dogma infallibly, but this isn't an object of said infallibility.

However, as I said, any cables or lines are out of the question as the entire Host was broken and consumed.

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

Brian37's picture

StMichael wrote:

StMichael wrote:
The Holy See finds a miracle credible, but does not obligate anyone to believe in a specific miracle. The Holy See does not define these as dogma, nor does it make sense to do so (they are not articles of faith!). He does have the ability to define dogma infallibly, but this isn't an object of said infallibility. However, as I said, any cables or lines are out of the question as the entire Host was broken and consumed.

I own the Brooklyn Bridge. Did you know that?

I am an authority of that claim because I am real and the Brooklyn Bridge is real too. I'll sell it to you since I own it.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37

LeftofLarry's picture

StMichael wrote:

StMichael wrote:
Wonderful. That doesn't mean that they are thus false.

True...but what I was saying is that I have first hand account of these "miracles" and let me tell you....the vendors are not far off with their statues of mary etc...right at the holy sites.  it's a big scam...all of it. 

 

StMichael wrote:
  Of course, only if you start off with the assumption that they are both false and deceptive.

It's not an assumption it's a rational realization that magic does not exist. 

 

StMichael wrote:
  Then why haven't the most eminent medical scientists disproved most of these miracles? Why are they still unexplainable? No magic tricks.
 

Ha,  yes.. I knew this was coming. First of all...the vatican and churches allows no scientists to study these supposed miracles...under the sanctity of the church, secondly these miracles seem to be one of a kind occurances....would this priest repeat the miracle?  this is hocus pocus man.... designed exactly for people like you.  The non-skeptics.   

StMichael wrote:
Actually, I remember an apparition of the Blessed Virgin to Muslims being mentioned once. I'd have to go look it up. However, I do know that she has appeared to Hindus to effect conversions, in a famous instance at, I believe, Valiyapally. There are other examples of that, however.

I've never heard of such things....and even if there is a "supposed" apparition..the ratio between the apparition in europe and south america vs. the apparitions in the middle east or india..is by far.....outnumbered....interesting fact. 

StMichael wrote:
The miracles in Italy and in the rest of the world are easily ascertainable by any believer or non-believer. Those that are permanent, like that at Lanciano, are easily investigatable.

Well then let the scientists in.  Apparently only 1 scientist has investigated the "flesh" and perhaps it was flesh but it could have been from anyone....no?  I urge the church to give up this flesh and let it be studied along with the blood from St. Gennaro in Naples. Put your money where your mouth is, I say (not you, I mean the church who claims these things).

StMichael wrote:
  God has often done things like this. However, I don't know. You'd have to ask Him. He allows certain bad things to happen for the greater good, in the end.

Oh believe me, I've asked and asked..got no response..kinda like a room full of crickets.  Greater good huh?  Innocent children dying of malaria every year is for the greater good?  Anancephalic babies being born is for the greater good?  Cancer, HIV, tsunamis, earthquakes, tornadoes, rape, murder, war, hunger, menstrual pain, misogyny, etcetera etcetera etcetera...all fo the greater good?  How exactly does a poor child in Ghana in some small village suffering from cyclic 48 hour bouts of 107 degree fevers, whose anemia has reached critical levels and who's cerebral capillaries are clogged by cerebral malaria, caused by a small parasite of the genus Plasmodium, come into play for the greater good?   What is exactly god's idea when he created malaria?

StMichael wrote:
  God allowed us to choose death rather than life. Miracles are His call for us to return to Him. If we had listened to God, no such wars would happen and no hunger/disease would exist. I think also that the overwhelming number of these miracles is fairly compelling. Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom, StMichael

I just think you are disillusioned, my friend.  It's no fault of your own. I just think whether you'd be the same person if you were born in Afghanistan. 

And one more thing... I find it ironic how that "specific" mass was videotaped in such detail as the miracle was occuring.  I don't know how they do it in France, but Italy's masses are usually not televised or videotaped. Did they know the miracle was going to happen? Did they get a fax from god saying..oh today a plate will wobble on the altar? cause the camera seemed perfectly positioned and all the actors seem ready on cue....hmmm........... 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.

StMichael's picture

Quote: True...but what I

Quote:
True...but what I was saying is that I have first hand account of these "miracles" and let me tell you....the vendors are not far off with their statues of mary etc...right at the holy sites. it's a big scam...all of it.

I know about these shrines. I have been to many and even have some in my diocese. I know people make money off it. However, that is no reason to discount the miracle wholesale. People make money off a great deal of things.

Quote:
It's not an assumption it's a rational realization that magic does not exist.

Well, it's not magic, for starters. Second, there is a good reason that miracles are possible following on the naturally known fact that God exists and orders all things in the universe. Third, there is no reason why you ought to maintain that miracles are impossible.

Quote:
Ha, yes.. I knew this was coming. First of all...the vatican and churches allows no scientists to study these supposed miracles...under the sanctity of the church,

Oh yes they do. I have posted in other forums documents published in medical journals which were used in canonization processes, and have show scientific reports being used in the verification of certain miracles. Scientific and medical professionals are invited to examine them.

Quote:
secondly these miracles seem to be one of a kind occurances....would this priest repeat the miracle? this is hocus pocus man.... designed exactly for people like you. The non-skeptics.

Of course the priest cannot repeat this particular miracle. It was an unintended miracle that had nothing to do with the priest wanting it to happen. There are miracles, however, that are not singular occurences. I have pointed in other forums to the miracle at Lanciano (which you might have seen in Italy), but there are many others of this variety.

Quote:
I've never heard of such things....and even if there is a "supposed" apparition..the ratio between the apparition in europe and south america vs. the apparitions in the middle east or india..is by far.....outnumbered....interesting fact.

Well, for one I don't think that's true at all. There are apparitions in the Middle East and in India that have happened. Surely, there are more famous apparitions in South America and in Europe, but there are really only a few approved apparitions in either countries.

Quote:
Well then let the scientists in. Apparently only 1 scientist has investigated the "flesh" and perhaps it was flesh but it could have been from anyone....no? I urge the church to give up this flesh and let it be studied along with the blood from St. Gennaro in Naples. Put your money where your mouth is, I say (not you, I mean the church who claims these things).

Both have been studied multiple times. St. Gennaro's blood in particular has been studied, but the Church has tried to do so without opening the containing vial, to avoid contamination of the contents. Non-invasive techniques tend to be preferred in those matters. However, the miracle at Lanciano has had quite a few seperate studies, as it has been a quite long-standing miracle. The most recent study occurred in 1970, but there have been numerous investigations beforehand. If you want a more complete list, you can either e-mail, fax, or call the shrine itself.

Quote:
Oh believe me, I've asked and asked..got no response..kinda like a room full of crickets.

Asked who exactly?

Quote:
Greater good huh? Innocent children dying of malaria every year is for the greater good? Anancephalic babies being born is for the greater good? Cancer, HIV, tsunamis, earthquakes, tornadoes, rape, murder, war, hunger, menstrual pain, misogyny, etcetera etcetera etcetera...all fo the greater good? How exactly does a poor child in Ghana in some small village suffering from cyclic 48 hour bouts of 107 degree fevers, whose anemia has reached critical levels and who's cerebral capillaries are clogged by cerebral malaria, caused by a small parasite of the genus Plasmodium, come into play for the greater good? What is exactly god's idea when he created malaria?

God neither desired to introduce suffering, nor created suffering and death. God never created any of these things. Original sin and the fall of man caused suffering and death to enter the world. God's plan did not desire this. He tolerated our fall so that, "grace might abound all the more." I cannot say the specific purpose of someone's suffering, but I can say that all suffering was assumed by Christ for the salvation of the world. The world and its suffering only makes sense in light of the crucifixion of Christ. He assumed all our pain and death, God Himself suffering what we suffer.
Why did God allow suffering? I compare it to a lover and his beloved. In a relationship, even when someone does something that the other knows is bad, the lover still lets his beloved cause her own hurt in turning away from him because he loves her so much. God loved us so much that He, out of love for our own choice, allowed us to turn away from Him. He had to hang Himself on a tree to get our attention.

Quote:
And one more thing... I find it ironic how that "specific" mass was videotaped in such detail as the miracle was occuring. I don't know how they do it in France, but Italy's masses are usually not televised or videotaped. Did they know the miracle was going to happen? Did they get a fax from god saying..oh today a plate will wobble on the altar? cause the camera seemed perfectly positioned and all the actors seem ready on cue....hmmm...........

Nonsense. Masses are taped all the time in America for television. The same thing occurs in France. This especially was a rather big event because it was the Mass for a convocation of Trappist abbots. The camera was of course positioned on the altar because that is where Mass happens. In fact, however, the camera does move away throughout the film, which can be rather annoying sometimes. And of course the priest is the focus of the shot, because he is the presider at the Mass.

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

triften's picture

So the top wafer dries out

So the top wafer dries out a bit more and turns inside out? It didn't hover. The close up shows one curved up on top of one curved down.

-Triften 

LeftofLarry's picture

StMichael wrote: I know

StMichael wrote:
I know about these shrines. I have been to many and even have some in my diocese. I know people make money off it. However, that is no reason to discount the miracle wholesale. People make money off a great deal of things.

Right, people do make money off of lots of stuff. I just find it curious they would make money off of god. hmmm........ 

StMichael wrote:
Well, it's not magic, for starters. Second, there is a good reason that miracles are possible following on the naturally known fact that God exists and orders all things in the universe. Third, there is no reason why you ought to maintain that miracles are impossible.

Faith based fallacies.  Following your logic there is no reason why not to believe in zeus or or any of the other 3000+ Gods that have been invented by man kind.  Your assumptions of belief stem from faith, and faith is not rational.  It is lazy.  Faith cannot be tested, empirically speaking, therefore not worth wasting time on it. 

StMichael wrote:
Oh yes they do. I have posted in other forums documents published in medical journals which were used in canonization processes, and have show scientific reports being used in the verification of certain miracles. Scientific and medical professionals are invited to examine them.

You make the assertions here so show me peer reviewed sceintific journal entries, proving miracles exist, show and tell....

 

StMichael wrote:
  Of course the priest cannot repeat this particular miracle. It was an unintended miracle that had nothing to do with the priest wanting it to happen. There are miracles, however, that are not singular occurences. I have pointed in other forums to the miracle at Lanciano (which you might have seen in Italy), but there are many others of this variety.

I find it ironic that the priests were not even shaken with joy at the "miracle" instead they seemed to have expected it.  This is a hoax much like the lochness monster.

StMichael wrote:
  Well, for one I don't think that's true at all. There are apparitions in the Middle East and in India that have happened. Surely, there are more famous apparitions in South America and in Europe, but there are really only a few approved apparitions in either countries.

As I mentioned earlier, you make the claims, show and tell. 

StMichael wrote:
Both have been studied multiple times. St. Gennaro's blood in particular has been studied, but the Church has tried to do so without opening the containing vial, to avoid contamination of the contents. Non-invasive techniques tend to be preferred in those matters. However, the miracle at Lanciano has had quite a few seperate studies, as it has been a quite long-standing miracle. The most recent study occurred in 1970, but there have been numerous investigations beforehand. If you want a more complete list, you can either e-mail, fax, or call the shrine itself.

Oh that's convenient isn't it.  If San Gennaro's blood is so divine, surely exposing it to air would not ruin it.  there is no way you can study blood within the confines of a sealed vial and confirm it's blood. It's so convenient.  No the miracel of Lanciano was studied once by Odoardo Linoli in the 80's and he concluded that the tissue is of human flesh. However, this does not prove that it is divine in nature, it does prove however that the church will go to great sick lenghts to keep miracles alive.  Also, I have not seen his work published in ANY peer reviewed sceintific journal. As I said show and tell.  For all Iknow he could have lied, it is Italy after all.

 

StMichael wrote:
  Asked who exactly?

That's what I kept asking myself...who exactly am I talking to? It is an imaginary friend. 

StMichael wrote:
God neither desired to introduce suffering, nor created suffering and death.

Then god is not omnipotent. 

StMichael wrote:
God never created any of these things. Original sin and the fall of man caused suffering and death to enter the world.

Then god is not omniscient. 

StMichael wrote:
God's plan did not desire this. He tolerated our fall so that, "grace might abound all the more."

Then god is not benevolent. 

StMichael wrote:
I cannot say the specific purpose of someone's suffering, but I can say that all suffering was assumed by Christ for the salvation of the world.

Is that so?  Explain that to the kid dying of cancer for no apparent reason whatsoever but to fulfill some imaginary person's sadistic desires. 

StMichael wrote:
The world and its suffering only makes sense in light of the crucifixion of Christ. He assumed all our pain and death, God Himself suffering what we suffer.

Really? and how exactly is that supposed to help, again the innocent child dying of malaria?  You talk much talk but give no answers, and you claim ignorance of God's ways. However, you insist that you have some kind of divine knowledge that god has a plan.. So what is it..do you or don't you?

StMichael wrote:
Why did God allow suffering? I compare it to a lover and his beloved. In a relationship, even when someone does something that the other knows is bad, the lover still lets his beloved cause her own hurt in turning away from him because he loves her so much. God loved us so much that He, out of love for our own choice, allowed us to turn away from Him. He had to hang Himself on a tree to get our attention.

Love? You see the love this god is creating here on earth...it's a love of hypocrisy, hatred, bigotry, greed and war. 

StMichael wrote:
Nonsense. Masses are taped all the time in America for television. The same thing occurs in France. This especially was a rather big event because it was the Mass for a convocation of Trappist abbots. The camera was of course positioned on the altar because that is where Mass happens. In fact, however, the camera does move away throughout the film, which can be rather annoying sometimes. And of course the priest is the focus of the shot, because he is the presider at the Mass.

No, the camera was positioned straight on the plate...don't say it wasn't..caus you would be lying. Never have I seen a mass videotaped where they zoom so close to the altar almost cutting the preists head off.  that is your wishful thinking.  And anyway, as I said I've seen Penn and Teller do better tricks and they are atheists. 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.

StMichael's picture

Quote: Right, people do

Quote:
Right, people do make money off of lots of stuff. I just find it curious they would make money off of god. hmmm........

I did not say it was just. But people do do so, as they make money off everything else they can. But that is not by itself an argument against its validity.

Quote:
Faith based fallacies. Following your logic there is no reason why not to believe in zeus or or any of the other 3000+ Gods that have been invented by man kind. Your assumptions of belief stem from faith, and faith is not rational. It is lazy. Faith cannot be tested, empirically speaking, therefore not worth wasting time on it.

Your claim that faith cannot be tested "empirically" is ambiguous. A great deal cannot be tested empirically, but you believe it. On the other hand, I believe clearly that one can test the object of faith. It is with good reason that the Eastern Church venerates Saint Thomas the Apostle as a sort of apostle of common sense in verifying the resurrection of Christ.

Quote:
You make the assertions here so show me peer reviewed sceintific journal entries, proving miracles exist, show and tell....

The example I know of well is from the Hawaiian Medical Journal, October 2000, which was an article submission from a spontaneous remission of metastatic cancer that occurred because of prayers to a Fr. Damien Molokai, which miracle is being used to support his canonization. There are other examples, one that I know being the studies of Lanciano and its eucharistic miracle that occured in 1970 and are available from the shrine itself.

Quote:

I find it ironic that the priests were not even shaken with joy at the "miracle" instead they seemed to have expected it. This is a hoax much like the lochness monster.

People didn't notice it going on until they saw the video. The bishop is likewise looking down at the Host and cannot see it levitating from his point of view. If it was a hoax, would you have expected people to be just sitting there, not noticing it, or would they be jumping in the air shouting, "Hallelujah! A Miracle!" I doubt they would, in the event of a hoax, not call attention to the miracle. However, the bishops in the film go right on saying Mass and never noticed it until afterward.

Quote:
Oh that's convenient isn't it. If San Gennaro's blood is so divine, surely exposing it to air would not ruin it. there is no way you can study blood within the confines of a sealed vial and confirm it's blood. It's so convenient.

You can using light spectrometry. Further, San Gennaro is not an approved miracle, so I would not really advocate it. I find other examples more compelling evidence, even though San Gennaro is impressive.

Quote:

No the miracel of Lanciano was studied once by Odoardo Linoli in the 80's and he concluded that the tissue is of human flesh. However, this does not prove that it is divine in nature, it does prove however that the church will go to great sick lenghts to keep miracles alive.

You would be utterly unable, of course, by scientific evidence to show that it was flesh from the man-God Jesus Christ. However, the other evidence seems quite compelling. Namely, that the tissue has, without preservation or any other means of protection other than the monstrance itself, been preserved without the least decay or change in the past 1200 years. Which is an event that is clearly demonstrable. The very fact that they could do blood tests on the cells that are in the container after 1200 years shows that there is something not caused by man in that flask.

Quote:
Also, I have not seen his work published in ANY peer reviewed sceintific journal. As I said show and tell. For all Iknow he could have lied, it is Italy after all.

The man who conducted that study was a chief scientist in Italy. He is not faking any studies. I am not sure if it was or was not published anywhere. I suppose it probably got published in an Italian journal in the 80s but I just don't have access to those. His report, however, speaks for itself.

Quote:
Then god is not omnipotent.

I see no reason to conclude that.

Quote:
Then god is not omniscient.

Again, no reason to conclude that. He knew it would happen, but did not intend or cause it to happen.

Quote:
Then god is not benevolent.

Exactly the opposite. God is benevolent and thus used this evil, which resulted from free choice, to bring about a greater good.

Quote:
Is that so? Explain that to the kid dying of cancer for no apparent reason whatsoever but to fulfill some imaginary person's sadistic desires.

I never said that it was to fulfill God's sadistic desires. Christ assumed suffering on Himself. He did not impose it on others.

Quote:
Really? and how exactly is that supposed to help, again the innocent child dying of malaria? You talk much talk but give no answers, and you claim ignorance of God's ways. However, you insist that you have some kind of divine knowledge that god has a plan.. So what is it..do you or don't you?

I don't have specific knowledge of how God's plan applies to you or me. I have knowledge in general of what God's plan is by Revelation. That Christ suffered and died is a consolation for us, as God Himself has taken human suffering and death and broken its power over us. I don't know how I would address a child dying of malaria. We ought to do all that is humanly possible to help him/her. Other than that, the child can take solace in the fact that shortly his suffering will be over and he will go to be with God for all eternity in paradise, where suffering will be destroyed and no more tears will be shed.

Quote:
Love? You see the love this god is creating here on earth...it's a love of hypocrisy, hatred, bigotry, greed and war.

God does not create these things. Hatred, bigotry, hypocrisy, and war are the result of sin and evil, not of God. God has already dealt the death knell to these by the conquering of evil by the death of Christ on the Cross, and His final coming will finish His work.

Quote:
No, the camera was positioned straight on the plate...don't say it wasn't..caus you would be lying. Never have I seen a mass videotaped where they zoom so close to the altar almost cutting the preists head off.

You need to watch more Masses on television, as that is precisely what they do. At the consecration, they zoom in on the Host. Just watch the American television station EWTN and watch their daily Mass. They'll do the same thing.

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

St. M wrote  "Non-invasive

St. M wrote

 "Non-invasive techniques tend to be preferred in those matters."

Gee, I wonder why? Could it be...obfuscation?

I'va also see my share of EWTN and I've never see any mass where they focused exclusively on the host during the celebration. When are you watching that you've seen this? 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin

StMichael's picture

Not in all miracles. Just in

Not in all miracles. Just in San Gennaro. They don't want to unseal the vial. Other shrines have given full clearance to investigate their miracles. I think Naples is afraid that if they open the vial that the miracle will stop. I can't claim to know a lot about it, and the Church itself has not verified that miracle, so I would be hestiant to bring it up.

However, going to ewtn.org, you can watch their daily Mass. You can see how they zoom in on the Host during the consecration and elevation.

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

LeftofLarry's picture

StMichael wrote:

StMichael wrote:
I did not say it was just. But people do do so, as they make money off everything else they can. But that is not by itself an argument against its validity.

Perhaps, not an argument against its validity, but it certainly supports the idea that people make money off of this, and in my opinion..if it's such a miracle/holy occurence, why would any right minded religious person feel the need to profit from it? I just find it curious and non-conducive to the validity and truthfulness of the event. Anyway...I guess this is a moot point.

StMichael wrote:
Your claim that faith cannot be tested "empirically" is ambiguous. A great deal cannot be tested empirically, but you believe it. On the other hand, I believe clearly that one can test the object of faith. It is with good reason that the Eastern Church venerates Saint Thomas the Apostle as a sort of apostle of common sense in verifying the resurrection of Christ.

I believe now you are putting words in my mouth. Name one thing I beleive that is not open ot empircal and falsifiable scientific testing. Veneration of saints from a body who considers itself divine enough to support the existence of god, yet humble enough to not know "god's plan" is not exactly the kind of empirical testing I'm talking about here. That's in a way, like defining the word by using the word in a sentence. It's circular logic. Plus you never really answered how then would it not be possible to believe in the the 3000+ other gods out there..... You never know how many of them you are pissing off right now and who's hell you're going to end up in. You take it on faith that your religion is the right one...well so do the followers of the other 3000+ religions out there.

StMichael wrote:
The example I know of well is from the Hawaiian Medical Journal, October 2000, which was an article submission from a spontaneous remission of metastatic cancer that occurred because of prayers to a Fr. Damien Molokai, which miracle is being used to support his canonization.

oh wait do you mean this?

Complete spontaneous regression of cancer: four case reports, review of literature, and discussion of possible mechanisms involved.

By: Walter Y.M. Chang MD, FACS

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=DisplayFiltered&DB=pubmed

Where he describes remission of cancer and the Possible mechanisms involved in cancer regression.

hmm...let's see here.....let's see....

oh here we are: Spontaneous regression or remission (SR) of cancers has been defined as the disappearance of the malignancies without any treatment or with obviously inadequate treatment.

here is what it says as potential causes: The literature of SR of cancers was reviewed and various mechanisms possibly involved in the disappearance of the cancers were discussed. Although immune modulation has been stated to be the most likely process causing SR, other mechanisms, such as genetic therapy, withdrawal of carcinogens, infection, fever and vaccine roles, apoptosis, antibody, antiangiogenesis and maturation mechanisms, withdrawal of therapy, natural killer activity, endocrine, hormonal, and pregnancy factors, and prayers or psychoneuro-religious participation were also mentioned. Induction and inhibition of malignant protein expression and repair of gene damage may prove to be the more important processes in cancer regression.

This was stated in the abstract of this review journal article.

I will say this...this is not by far any conclusive evidence regarding SR. This does not prove by one bit that it was God who performed a miracle. This is taken by the faithfully blind who know nothing of immunology and cancer biology as faith. Why? Because it's easy to default to it. It's lazy. God did it end of story. The immune system is a complex system. Involving genetics and epigenetics, cell signaling and modulation etc... There are a million reasons why cancer patients can go into remission. Also here is another little story you might be interested in:

http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/thuo-hypothesis.html

The author of this story, presents a more plausible, testeble idea. IOW: not lazy.

Faith based healing has been shown scientifically to not be true http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2002901053_pray31.html

So do you have any other "evidence" or is God in all his glory only give you a short phrase in ONE scientific article about a miracle.

Cause it seems to me...if this is all you have to go by..then...the evidence is not on YOUR side.

 

StMichael wrote:
There are other examples, one that I know being the studies of Lanciano and its eucharistic miracle that occured in 1970 and are available from the shrine itself.

ok, we've gone over this one as well.....circles.

StMichael wrote:
People didn't notice it going on until they saw the video. The bishop is likewise looking down at the Host and cannot see it levitating from his point of view. If it was a hoax, would you have expected people to be just sitting there, not noticing it, or would they be jumping in the air shouting, "Hallelujah! A Miracle!" I doubt they would, in the event of a hoax, not call attention to the miracle. However, the bishops in the film go right on saying Mass and never noticed it until afterward.

They were looking right at it, especially the priest behind the one holding his hands out.

StMichael wrote:
You can using light spectrometry. Further, San Gennaro is not an approved miracle, so I would not really advocate it. I find other examples more compelling evidence, even though San Gennaro is impressive.

If you knew anything about spectrophotometry you would realize that you cannot use a circular glass sphere to analyze lightwaves, due to the fact that the glass sphere may in fact bend the light waves giving false results. also, the thickness of the liquid/solid of the supposed San Gennaro's blood would not allow spectrometry or spectrophotometry to work. You would have to take a sample, solubilize the erythrocytic proteins and run the sample through a spectrophotometer. The true explanation on why they don't want the vial opened, is simple: their hoax would be discovered.

StMichael wrote:
You would be utterly unable, of course, by scientific evidence to show that it was flesh from the man-God Jesus Christ. However, the other evidence seems quite compelling. Namely, that the tissue has, without preservation or any other means of protection other than the monstrance itself, been preserved without the least decay or change in the past 1200 years.

How do you know they don't go to the freshly delivered corpses a the cemetary and take samples, or pay the morgue to get fresh samples as the one they have decays? Can you prove without a shadow of a doubt that they are not doing that? Also, can you prove that the tissue is NOT fixed? You can't, and I'll tell you why, there has only been one study done on this..over 20 years ago.

 

StMichael wrote:
Which is an event that is clearly demonstrable. The very fact that they could do blood tests on the cells that are in the container after 1200 years shows that there is something not caused by man in that flask.

Sorry, I'm not convinced and neither is anyone who has a rational mind.

StMichael wrote:
The man who conducted that study was a chief scientist in Italy. He is not faking any studies. I am not sure if it was or was not published anywhere. I suppose it probably got published in an Italian journal in the 80s but I just don't have access to those. His report, however, speaks for itself.

Well what good is it if it's not accessible to the public? THat's the beauty of scientific literature. also, please post his report from a non-biased source.

leftoflarry wrote:
Then god is not omnipotent.
StMichael wrote:
I see no reason to conclude that.

you see no reason period.

leftoflarry wrote:
Then god is not omniscient.
StMichael wrote:
Again, no reason to conclude that. He knew it would happen, but did not intend or cause it to happen.
leftoflarry wrote:
Then god is not benevolent.
StMichael wrote:
Exactly the opposite. God is benevolent and thus used this evil, which resulted from free choice, to bring about a greater good.

If god knew it would happen, but did not intend it..then he cannot by logic be omniscient or omnipotent and if he knew it was going to happen and let it happen anyway, then he can, by logic not be benevolent. How can a benevolent god use evil? If we have free choice, then god is not omniscient, because if he knows we are going to do evil, then our path is set. And if god creates everything and lets us do evil, then he is not benevolent. Get the twisted logic here? And what IS this greater good you talk about?

StMichael wrote:
I never said that it was to fulfill God's sadistic desires. Christ assumed suffering on Himself. He did not impose it on others.

And how is this any relevant to human suffering? What he suffered so we must all suffer? including innocent children? And you tell me this is the works of a benevolent god?

StMichael wrote:
I don't have specific knowledge of how God's plan applies to you or me. I have knowledge in general of what God's plan is by Revelation.

So you're only semi divine in nature. You claim to have "knowledge" based on revelation, yet you don't know what that knowledge consists of...hmm....oooookkkk..

StMichael wrote:
That Christ suffered and died is a consolation for us, as God Himself has taken human suffering and death and broken its power over us.

How bout that christ died is a guilt driven propaganda (now bein exploited by hollywood) to convince the masses using human emotion of a lie that never really existed.

StMichael wrote:
I don't know how I would address a child dying of malaria. We ought to do all that is humanly possible to help him/her.

I agree... I research malaria. I'm doing something..what about you?

StMichael wrote:
Other than that, the child can take solace in the fact that shortly his suffering will be over and he will go to be with God for all eternity in paradise, where suffering will be destroyed and no more tears will be shed.

Well that's easy for you to say isn't it? I find this to be a lazy cop-out.

StMichael wrote:
God does not create these things. Hatred, bigotry, hypocrisy, and war are the result of sin and evil, not of God.

But...god is the creator, therefore created sin and evil...again...turning to the whole benevolence, omniscience and omnipotency argument. If god did not create these things, then he is not omnipotent.

StMichael wrote:
God has already dealt the death knell to these by the conquering of evil by the death of Christ on the Cross, and His final coming will finish His work.

I don't see suffering ending on earth...so I don't quite think there has been any death knells that were dealth.

StMichael wrote:
You need to watch more Masses on television, as that is precisely what they do. At the consecration, they zoom in on the Host. Just watch the American television station EWTN and watch their daily Mass. They'll do the same thing.

I've been to plenty of masses. But...even if you are right, it doesn't prove the miracle true.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.

StMichael's picture

Quote: Perhaps, not an

Quote:
Perhaps, not an argument against its validity, but it certainly supports the idea that people make money off of this, and in my opinion..if it's such a miracle/holy occurence, why would any right minded religious person feel the need to profit from it? I just find it curious and non-conducive to the validity and truthfulness of the event. Anyway...I guess this is a moot point.

Right-minded religious folks do not make money off it.

Quote:
I believe now you are putting words in my mouth. Name one thing I beleive that is not open ot empircal and falsifiable scientific testing.

Two varieties of things that are not open to empirical tests: why only empirically verified truth is true, and why the moon is not made of green cheese. Both of which you cannot empirically verify.

Quote:
Veneration of saints from a body who considers itself divine enough to support the existence of god, yet humble enough to not know "god's plan" is not exactly the kind of empirical testing I'm talking about here. That's in a way, like defining the word by using the word in a sentence. It's circular logic.

I don't really understand what you are saying here. It is not circular to say that we know God's plan for humanity on a general, but not specific level. Nor is it circular to say we can know that God exists but that we cannot know what He intends in a specific circumstance or situation. There is no contradiction there.

Quote:

Plus you never really answered how then would it not be possible to believe in the the 3000+ other gods out there..... You never know how many of them you are pissing off right now and who's hell you're going to end up in. You take it on faith that your religion is the right one...well so do the followers of the other 3000+ religions out there.

Faith is reasonable. I believe because Catholicism is worthy of belief. First, on the level of natural reason, we can know without God's revelation that there is a God and that He is one. We likewise know that He is all-powerful, all-knowing, and created all things, continually guiding them by His Providence. This knowledge rules out a good deal of religious opinion. Second, we have a negative proof that Catholicism is correct because it does not contradict anything we know naturally and is internally logically coherent. Third, we have positive probable proof that it is correct from the miracles Christ, His saints, and the Church still performs to authenticate its claims. All of which together form a rather credible case for belief in the Catholic Church.

Quote:
oh wait do you mean this?

Yes. However, you did not read the article or the doctor's testimony. He concludes that no such mechanism was present in the particular case I am discussing of the lady healed by the intercession of Fr. Molokai.

Quote:

This does not prove by one bit that it was God who performed a miracle.

If there were no external signs of immune activity, if the white blood count was normal, if no natural mechanism seemed to be at play in this case, if the healing occured instantly with prayer to Fr. Damien, it seems credible to associate the healing directly with the prayer to Fr. Molokai.

Quote:

This is taken by the faithfully blind who know nothing of immunology and cancer biology as faith. Why? Because it's easy to default to it.

You forget that the good doctor himself attributes this case to God alone, while the others he attributes to other causes. And I think he knows a bit of biology.

Quote:

They were looking right at it, especially the priest behind the one holding his hands out.

Again, if it was a fake and they noticed, why no expressions? If it was a fake, I would expect big action and consternation, drawing attention to it.

Quote:
If you knew anything about spectrophotometry you would realize that you cannot use a circular glass sphere to analyze lightwaves, due to the fact that the glass sphere may in fact bend the light waves giving false results. also, the thickness of the liquid/solid of the supposed San Gennaro's blood would not allow spectrometry or spectrophotometry to work.

The error that results from a rounded glass could be taken into account by taking sample readings from multiple places. I think the scientists knew what they were doing.

Quote:

You would have to take a sample, solubilize the erythrocytic proteins and run the sample through a spectrophotometer. The true explanation on why they don't want the vial opened, is simple: their hoax would be discovered.

Very possibly the vial will be opened. It has not been so yet, however. It has nothing to do with a hoax.

Quote:
How do you know they don't go to the freshly delivered corpses a the cemetary and take samples, or pay the morgue to get fresh samples as the one they have decays?

Because the flesh is always the same in the monstrance.

Quote:
Can you prove without a shadow of a doubt that they are not doing that? Also, can you prove that the tissue is NOT fixed?

I cannot with complete, beyond a shadow of a doubt certainty, prove that this is not the case. Neither can you prove to me that the moon is not made of green cheese with complete, beyond a shadow of a doubt, certainty. I can have, however, a very reasonable belief that this is a real miracle.

Quote:

You can't, and I'll tell you why, there has only been one study done on this..over 20 years ago.

There had been studies before this. And there will most likely continue to be studies.

Quote:
Sorry, I'm not convinced and neither is anyone who has a rational mind.

I see it as utterly reasonable to conclude that this was not caused by man.

Quote:

Well what good is it if it's not accessible to the public? THat's the beauty of scientific literature. also, please post his report from a non-biased source.

I don't have the report on hand. You can order a copy from the shrine: Tel. 0872/713189 - Corso Rome, 66034 Lanciano (Chieti). They have records of all scientific documentation.

Quote:
If god knew it would happen, but did not intend it..then he cannot by logic be omniscient or omnipotent

Omnipotence does not mean that He cannot allow a free agent to be free in choosing. He does not desire a free agent to choose evil, but He allows it to happen because the agent is free to choose. God limits His power by His own choice in regard to free will.

Quote:
and if he knew it was going to happen and let it happen anyway, then he can, by logic not be benevolent. How can a benevolent god use evil?

He allows evil, which exists by free choice, to work out for the good.

Quote:

If we have free choice, then god is not omniscient, because if he knows we are going to do evil, then our path is set.

Why? There is no necessity from His knowing it, any more than if I see that somebody is sitting in a chair that I impose necessity on them so that they must sit in the chair.

Quote:
And if god creates everything and lets us do evil, then he is not benevolent.

God lets evil happen because men and angels will it freely. He, however, uses these free decisions to work out for the best.

Quote:
And how is this any relevant to human suffering? What he suffered so we must all suffer? including innocent children? And you tell me this is the works of a benevolent god?

No, we suffer and so Christ suffered to conquer suffering.

Quote:
So you're only semi divine in nature. You claim to have "knowledge" based on revelation, yet you don't know what that knowledge consists of...hmm....oooookkkk..

I never claimed to be divine or semi-divine. I have knowledge of how God's plan works in general, but not individually.

Quote:

How bout that christ died is a guilt driven propaganda (now bein exploited by hollywood) to convince the masses using human emotion of a lie that never really existed.

? Hollywood hasn't been around since Christ was crucified. Further, there is no guilt in Christ's death. Guilt was expiated by it. It is the exact opposite.

Quote:
I agree... I research malaria. I'm doing something..what about you?

I work with charity organizations and I am studying to help people in the future as a priest.

Quote:
Well that's easy for you to say isn't it? I find this to be a lazy cop-out.

I don't see why it is a cop-out at all.

Quote:
But...god is the creator, therefore created sin and evil...again...turning to the whole benevolence, omniscience and omnipotency argument. If god did not create these things, then he is not omnipotent.

God cannot bring into being something that has no being in the first place. Sin and evil are non-entities. They are negative beings. They are lacks of being in real things. God does not and cannot create them. It has nothing to do with omnipotence; they just don't and can't, by definition, exist.

Quote:
I don't see suffering ending on earth...so I don't quite think there has been any death knells that were dealth.

Suffering awaits its final and complete destruction in the second coming of Christ.

Quote:
I've been to plenty of masses. But...even if you are right, it doesn't prove the miracle true.

No, it doesn't. But it eliminates your particular accusation.

Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom,
StMichael

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

zarathustra's picture

StMichael wrote: I think

StMichael wrote:
I think the point of this miracle, as with any miracle, is to provide evidence for people who do not believe that Revelation is correct. 

Then why are people like you (already believed in the first place) the only ones convinced of its miraculous nature, while the rest of us are rolling are eyes?  If god is trying to convince us skeptics, you w think he'd catch on by now that he needs to try a little harder.  

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††

StMichael's picture

Your refusal to acknowledge

Your refusal to acknowledge it is not my or God's fault. He has provided clear evidence to confirm His Revelation in Christ. The least you can do is not claim that my faith is irrational. It has clear reasons, but you do not accept them. Mind you, I could not bring up the MANY miracles both approved and unapproved which have occurred. Further, the prophecies, growth, and stability of the Church likewise shows its divine character. They are clear reasons why we can believe with a reasonable submission of intellect and will to what the Church teaches.

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

zarathustra's picture

My refusal to acknowledge

My refusal to acknowledge it is god's fault, Michael. As you said the purpose of these "miracles" is to win skeptics like me over, not to give believers like you the tingles. If these things are to be more credible to me than "2 + 2 = 4" (as they are for you, by your own admission), god needs to stop being so amateur about it. Tell mr. omnipotence to take it up a notch. The least I can do is to claim that your faith is irrational, rather than question your basic intelligence (which I don't). Wouldn't you think it irrational if you saw a video of a falafel floating in the air at an Eid celebration in Riyadh, which an imam was touting as evidence of Allah's greatness? But a holy wafer doing a backflip in France? Yes, very rational.

"Submission of intellect" is very revealing. You have an intellect, Michael. Use it - don't bend it into submission.

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††

StMichael's picture

It is not to give me the

It is not to give me the tingles. Do you think I post it for my health? I am posting these miracles because they are evidence to support my claims. I have not seen anyone else claim so widespread miracles and evidence of this sort to support its claims. Protestants have generally eschewed this, and Muslims do not have it. The Jews don't have it, nor do Hindus, or many other major group. Catholicism is the only one that continues and has consistently pointed to miraculous things as evidence of its divine charism.
Further, the problem is on your end. There are a good deal of miracles that exist and have existed. It's your problem that you refuse to accept the evidence sitting before you. What would you want God to do? He has provided clear evidence here and elsewhere that it is He who really is revealing these things. The levitation of the Host is merely a little example of this, indicating belief in the Eucharist.
And, submission of intellect to faith is the only way the intellect can truly understand things beyond it. Open mindedness is good, but it exists with the goal of putting something in your head, not letting everything fall out.

Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom,
StMichael

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

triften's picture

StMichael wrote: The

StMichael wrote:
The levitation of the Host is merely a little example of this, indicating belief in the Eucharist.

It wasn't levitating. The wafer curved the other way. The closeup shows this.

-Triften 

GlamourKat's picture

With this video in mind, I

With this video in mind, I must resign my atheism.

This man truly is the messiah. I have seen it on celluloid, visible proof that HE is real!!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IG6IkL-yjCs

StMichael's picture

You can clearly see the

You can clearly see the bishop's vestments under the host. It is not upheld by anything. You also ought to look at the other videos that are on the website, which has the fuller video that shows more than the one I posted.

Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom,
StMichael

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

StMichael wrote: You can

StMichael wrote:
You can clearly see the bishop's vestments under the host. It is not upheld by anything. You also ought to look at the other videos that are on the website, which has the fuller video that shows more than the one I posted. Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom, StMichael

I'm not saying that it's being suspended from above, mind you. But if it were, you could still see the bishop's robes under the host.

Your statement adds nothing. 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin

StMichael's picture

It cannot be suspended by

It cannot be suspended by any strings or threads. It was completely consumed at the Mass! No threads removed, nothing. Further, as I said, nobody who evaluated the film who has expertise in these areas could find any mechanism to cause this action.

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

zarathustra's picture

Expertise in what?

Expertise in what? catholic dogma, or sleight of hand?

I really hope, for the sake of your god's dignity, that this isn't a divine miracle. It would appear he/she has way too much time on his hands. I'm picturing some old guy with mild dementia clapping his hands and saying gleefuly, "Oh looky-look! I made a piece of bread float! Wheeeee!"

 

 

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††

StMichael wrote:

StMichael wrote:
It cannot be suspended by any strings or threads. It was completely consumed at the Mass! No threads removed, nothing. Further, as I said, nobody who evaluated the film who has expertise in these areas could find any mechanism to cause this action.

Even that statement doesn't add anything as the host could simply be broken around the string and consumed.

Also, people with "expertise" who want to believe are sometimes the easiest to fool.

Again, I'm not saying that that's what happened. I just like finding other, more conventional possibilities instead of "God did it"

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin

StMichael's picture

I never claimed it to be

I never claimed it to be infallible proof. It is good proof and reasonable evidence for the truth of that doctrine, however.
And, no, the folks who authenticated it were not specialists in "dogma" but in sleight of hand and illusions on film.

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.

triften's picture

StMichael wrote: You can

StMichael wrote:
You can clearly see the bishop's vestments under the host. It is not upheld by anything. You also ought to look at the other videos that are on the website, which has the fuller video that shows more than the one I posted. Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom, StMichael

The wafer merely turns concave. You can see the vestsments to the left and right of the center. Look at the close up. It is clearly curved.

Also, look at their movements:the frame rate has been altered. This would make the small bounce that occured when the wafer curved appear longer than it actually was.

-Triften 

StMichael wrote: I never

StMichael wrote:
I never claimed it to be infallible proof. It is good proof and reasonable evidence for the truth of that doctrine, however. And, no, the folks who authenticated it were not specialists in "dogma" but in sleight of hand and illusions on film.

 Never said you did. You're going to wait until you receive word from the Vatican that they think it's infallible. Then you'll be chanting it as well.

Every time I hear someone talk about "experts" in such matters I am reminded of all the scientists and other experts who fell for Uri Geller hook, line and sinker. It also reminds me of Bill Frist's diagnosis of Terri Schiavo from looking at a videotape.   

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin

LeftofLarry's picture

StMichael wrote:

StMichael wrote:
Right-minded religious folks do not make money off it.

Perhaps, but if you look at religion as a whole..it's makin' a whole lotta money for a whole lotta people...I mean you know..look at the vatican, their own tv station, the vast resources allocated etc..etc..etc... the catholic pastor at my mother's church: St. Louis, used to drive a corvette..hmmm...yeah..if righteousness in religion is guaged by the lack of money, then my friend you're in the wrong religion. Then we have the evangelicals and  your Pat Robertsons, your Jerry Falwells yeah religion is big money..BIG MONEY.

StMichael wrote:
Two varieties of things that are not open to empirical tests: why only empirically verified truth is true, and why the moon is not made of green cheese. Both of which you cannot empirically verify.

You did not just ask why only empirically verified truth is true.  If we followed your school of thought, we would be nowhere as far as medicine or technology.  Would you be willing to take some chemo-therapeutic chemical for cancer, that has not been empirically tested?   Would you buy a 3000 dollar HD tv if it's never been tested to see if it works?  Would you buy a used car without testing it to see if it works?  I mean if you would take all this on "faith" then you should stop being a hypocrite in life and take EVERYTHING ON FAITH.    Also, the moon is not made of cheese, because 1, we've empirically verified it.  Do you forget the trip to the moon?  And 2, even IF we would not have gone to the moon, the default position that it would be made of cheese is wrong.  Just like the default position that a god exists is wrong.  And only empirically testing that assertion would I believe it to be true.  If you make a claim that the moon is made of chees, my friend you better prove it, and as such, if you claim there is a god, then my friend, you better prove it.

StMichael wrote:
I don't really understand what you are saying here. It is not circular to say that we know God's plan for humanity on a general, but not specific level. Nor is it circular to say we can know that God exists but that we cannot know what He intends in a specific circumstance or situation. There is no contradiction there.

What I mean here is that you believe someone who claims divine knowledge by then justifying your belief by that very same body.  You take the bible and what the vatican says as truth, yet when questioned about those beliefs, you use the bible and the vatican as proof. That's not independent verification, that's circular.    Also, you have so much faith in God's plan wihtout even knowing what God's plan is...how can anyone in their right mind, believe that?  If you were to buy a car on the assurance of the salesman, without really knowing any background info on the car OR the salesman, would you buy the used car?  If you're a man of faith, you would, I supposed, but that's just irrational.

StMichael wrote:
Faith is reasonable.

Faith is not reasonable because faith is knowledge without proof. As I said, if you feel it to be reasonable, then I suggest you stop taking medicines when sick, and rely solely on prayer.  You believe it so much, I'll make you a wager....for the rest of your life, stop going to a doctor, stop taking medicine no matter how serious the illness. Rely on prayer alone, if you are so convicted in your faith, then you should have no problem relying on prayer alone to fix your ailments. If you get a headache, don't take that secular medicine called tylenol, if you get cancer, don't take that evil secular drug called chemo.   Would you be willing to take this wager on faith? 

StMichael wrote:
I believe because Catholicism is worthy of belief. First, on the level of natural reason, we can know without God's revelation that there is a God and that He is one.

Again this is faith.  You are positive of the existence of god without proof.  And again if your faith is so strong see the wager above.  That is not natural reason, that is faith based boloney. You seem to be unable to give me fact based evidence only faith based evidence...and again, if your faith is that strong...you should then survive on prayer alone.

StMichael wrote:
We likewise know that He is all-powerful, all-knowing, and created all things, continually guiding them by His Providence. This knowledge rules out a good deal of religious opinion.
  

Here we go again..circular reasoning...we know we know we know..yet you have provided no proof of such knowledge. 

StMichael wrote:
Second, we have a negative proof that Catholicism is correct because it does not contradict anything we know naturally and is internally logically coherent.

What??????  again assertions with no proof.  We know We know We know...  why do you know? oh I know because I know, so that's settled.  Um..not quite. 

StMichael wrote:
Third, we have positive probable proof that it is correct from the miracles Christ, His saints, and the Church still performs to authenticate its claims. All of which together form a rather credible case for belief in the Catholic Church.

no, there is no credibility because it's all unsubstantiated. And I'll make you another wager.  I'll bet you that a muslim will have the same reasoning for his belief and his would be just as strong as yours...now why would you not believe him?  And the same reason why you would discredit his religion, is the same reason why I discredit both of them.  Get the drift here?  Both make assertions with no proof.  I mean a muslim will tell you he has positive knowledge that Allah is God almighty with muhammed being his prophet who rose to heaven on a horse.  You would then say, well that's silly why do you believe that? And the muslim would reply, it's in the Qu'ran, the oldest text there is and it's true.  Why wouldn't, you then believe him?   

 

StMichael wrote:
Yes. However, you did not read the article or the doctor's testimony. He concludes that no such mechanism was present in the particular case I am discussing of the lady healed by the intercession of Fr. Molokai.

Then why is it mentioned as the probable cause in the abstract, then if that's the case, the whole article is crap. 

StMichael wrote:
If there were no external signs of immune activity, if the white blood count was normal, if no natural mechanism seemed to be at play in this case, if the healing occured instantly with prayer to Fr. Damien, it seems credible to associate the healing directly with the prayer to Fr. Molokai.

No, because it has not been proven that it was prayer that did the healing.  Plus, another study has shown that prayer does not work. And..this is only ONE semi-documented case... which is not credible anyway. Also, it is the default position of the theist, to default to god doing it whenever they cannot explain something.  here's a quote:   "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."-- Charles Darwin 

StMichael wrote:
You forget that the good doctor himself attributes this case to God alone, while the others he attributes to other causes. And I think he knows a bit of biology.

Then the good doctor is not being honest with himself or the study he has conducted, and I"m still having a hard time finding the actual article..hmm...could it be that at a university setting, they decided to trash it based on the fact that it's not scientific?  I'm wondering why this would have even gone through peer review. 

StMichael wrote:
  Again, if it was a fake and they noticed, why no expressions? If it was a fake, I would expect big action and consternation, drawing attention to it.

I've seen secular magicians pull better tricks...man.... 

StMichael wrote:
  The error that results from a rounded glass could be taken into account by taking sample readings from multiple places. I think the scientists knew what they were doing.

Not scientifically viable.  The only true test is to open it and see. What are they afraid of anyway? It's divine in nature no human could possibly undermine the validity of Gods' divine intention. right? 

StMichael wrote:
Very possibly the vial will be opened. It has not been so yet, however. It has nothing to do with a hoax.

I'll gladly wait for that..by the way so you know.....I've been to that exact church and have seen it first hand.  They keep the vial so far away from the people, it's really hard to discern what's in that thing.  It's cloudy and murky..and really you can't really tell whether it's solid or liquid.  Most people take the priests' word for it.  On..well...faith. 

StMichael wrote:
Because the flesh is always the same in the monstrance.

A human heart is a human heart....no matter who's it is..it all looks alike. 

StMichael wrote:
I cannot with complete, beyond a shadow of a doubt certainty, prove that this is not the case. Neither can you prove to me that the moon is not made of green cheese with complete, beyond a shadow of a doubt, certainty. I can have, however, a very reasonable belief that this is a real miracle.

I bet you I can prove without the shadow of a doubt that the moon is not made of green cheese.  here you go: http://www.neiu.edu/~jmhemzac/mooncomp.htm

 

StMichael wrote:
You can't, and I'll tell you why, there has only been one study done on this..over 20 years ago.

And you compare oranges to apples.  Plus, the moon studies are on going my friend....we have the technology to study the moon and other planets without actually having to have to go there.  So your point, although, well taken, is moot. 

StMichael wrote:
There had been studies before this. And there will most likely continue to be studies.

I will look forward to these studies. 

StMichael wrote:
I see it as utterly reasonable to conclude that this was not caused by man.

 You see reason under a filter of faith.  This will allow you to "reasonably" conclude many things that are unreasonable.  But yet, you deny the very "reasonable" explanations for the existence of Allah as the true god or Zeus, or any of the other 3000+ gods out there.

StMichael wrote:
I don't have the report on hand. You can order a copy from the shrine: Tel. 0872/713189 - Corso Rome, 66034 Lanciano (Chieti). They have records of all scientific documentation.

And this report was written by, an unbiased, independent inquiry?

StMichael wrote:
Omnipotence does not mean that He cannot allow a free agent to be free in choosing. He does not desire a free agent to choose evil, but He allows it to happen because the agent is free to choose. God limits His power by His own choice in regard to free will.

and you know god limits his power by his own choice, because you have first hand knowledge of this?  Are you now saying you know god's will?  but I thought you said you didn't know god's will. Well what is it here do you or don't you?  I mean certainly, it seems as if on the one hand you claim ignorance of god's will, but now you're telling me you know for a fact god limits his powers by his own will?  you know god's will?

StMichael wrote:
He allows evil, which exists by free choice, to work out for the good.

So god uses evil for good.  That's an interesting twist on God's will.. You now apparently have become Gods' spokesman...please continue..this is getting very interesting. 

StMichael wrote:
Why? There is no necessity from His knowing it, any more than if I see that somebody is sitting in a chair that I impose necessity on them so that they must sit in the chair.

So now you're saying god does not know when we will be committing evil, so then that does kind of prove that he is not omniscient right?  You said it now..... there is no NEED for him to know...therefore he doesn't? But if he doesn't then by definition he cannot be omniscient. 

StMichael wrote:
God lets evil happen because men and angels will it freely. He, however, uses these free decisions to work out for the best.

Right....and again..the best being...... war, hatred, bigotry, environmental rape, misogyny, suffering...etc..etc..etc...

StMichael wrote:
No, we suffer and so Christ suffered to conquer suffering.

Why would christ need to conquer suffering? he created it. 

StMichael wrote:
I never claimed to be divine or semi-divine. I have knowledge of how God's plan works in general, but not individually.

And you have this partial knowledge..through......oh yeah wait, the vatican and the bible..forgot... circles (gettin' dizzy). 

StMichael wrote:
? Hollywood hasn't been around since Christ was crucified. Further, there is no guilt in Christ's death. Guilt was expiated by it. It is the exact opposite.
  

Really? Because it seems to me that Mia Colpa seems to be the way of the catholic church. 

 

StMichael wrote:
I work with charity organizations and I am studying to help people in the future as a priest.

Charity is good in the name of helping people and not proselytizing.  I agree.  But I have to disagree with you that becoming a priest will help out...but...anyway.... 

StMichael wrote:
I don't see why it is a cop-out at all.

 I think religion is a cop-out to thinking.

StMichael wrote:
God cannot bring into being something that has no being in the first place. Sin and evil are non-entities. They are negative beings. They are lacks of being in real things. God does not and cannot create them. It has nothing to do with omnipotence; they just don't and can't, by definition, exist.

So then evil is a force of it's own volition? Did god create gravity?  what about van der waals forces?  

StMichael wrote:
  Suffering awaits its final and complete destruction in the second coming of Christ.

Ah..the second coming.  The every so awaited joyous moment when the righteous fly to the sky...Israel is burned to the ground..and the rest of us are stuck here on earth as hell engulfs us all..... you mean that second coming? 

StMichael wrote:
No, it doesn't. But it eliminates your particular accusation. Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom, StMichael

 No, I'm not accusing anything, I just think this was set up as these "miracles" usually are.  That's all.

In Rationality,

Left of Larry 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.

StMichael's picture

Quote: Perhaps, but if you

Quote:
Perhaps, but if you look at religion as a whole..it's makin' a whole lotta money for a whole lotta people...I mean you know..look at the vatican, their own tv station, the vast resources allocated etc..etc..etc... the catholic pastor at my mother's church: St. Louis, used to drive a corvette..hmmm...yeah..if righteousness in religion is guaged by the lack of money, then my friend you're in the wrong religion. Then we have the evangelicals and your Pat Robertsons, your Jerry Falwells yeah religion is big money..BIG MONEY.

Bad people exist in religion. That doesn't mean that religion is false or that religion's aim is to make money. I point out the counterexamples such as the Missionaries of Charity or any other religious order which embraces evangelical poverty. There are bad religious people and bad clergy/religious, but that is not proof against the whole.

Quote:
You did not just ask why only empirically verified truth is true. If we followed your school of thought, we would be nowhere as far as medicine or technology. Would you be willing to take some chemo-therapeutic chemical for cancer, that has not been empirically tested? Would you buy a 3000 dollar HD tv if it's never been tested to see if it works? Would you buy a used car without testing it to see if it works? I mean if you would take all this on "faith" then you should stop being a hypocrite in life and take EVERYTHING ON FAITH.

Different truths have different modes of verification. A logical proof or mathematical proof cannot be verified with a microscope any more than what the temperature at the core of the earth is verified with a chicken baster. You are misapplying modes of verification. Further, you DO take many things on faith. You do take on faith the fact that people have verified that this TV has been tested and verified. It might be possible to do it, but you see no need to personally verify every claim.

Quote:
Also, the moon is not made of cheese, because 1, we've empirically verified it. Do you forget the trip to the moon?

You take on faith that people have verified it. I am not saying it is unreasonable to do so; in fact, it is perfectly justified. However, it is still a form of trust or faith in that verification.

Quote:

And 2, even IF we would not have gone to the moon, the default position that it would be made of cheese is wrong. Just like the default position that a god exists is wrong.

Why are thse positions wrong? The moon could be made of cheese. I also don't see why you assume God's non-existence can never be questioned.

Quote:
What I mean here is that you believe someone who claims divine knowledge by then justifying your belief by that very same body. You take the bible and what the vatican says as truth, yet when questioned about those beliefs, you use the bible and the vatican as proof. That's not independent verification, that's circular.

I am not using the Pope to prove the Pope's authority. I am using a verifiable miracle to prove the truth of the Catholic faith. Clearly different areas.

Quote:

Also, you have so much faith in God's plan wihtout even knowing what God's plan is...how can anyone in their right mind, believe that? If you were to buy a car on the assurance of the salesman, without really knowing any background info on the car OR the salesman, would you buy the used car? If you're a man of faith, you would, I supposed, but that's just irrational.

I never claim to have faith in God's plan. I would argue we can know that He has a "plan" by natural reason. We don't need revelation for that. Likewise, by faith we do know what God's "plan" is. That is basically the point.

Quote:
Faith is not reasonable because faith is knowledge without proof.

Faith is knowledge that is based on authority. I trust the places that tell me the moon-landing happened. I do so because evidence supports it. Likewise, I believe Christ was God because He and His Church perform miracles.

Quote:
As I said, if you feel it to be reasonable, then I suggest you stop taking medicines when sick, and rely solely on prayer.

That is contrary to faith and what the Church reveals.

Quote:
Again this is faith. You are positive of the existence of god without proof.

No I am not. Read my posts on my blog which outline five proofs that God exists. These are proofs from natural reason; no faith involved.

Quote:

What?????? again assertions with no proof. We know We know We know... why do you know? oh I know because I know, so that's settled. Um..not quite.

You might not know, but it is provable.

Quote:
no, there is no credibility because it's all unsubstantiated.

Which is unsubstantiated?

Quote:
And I'll make you another wager. I'll bet you that a muslim will have the same reasoning for his belief and his would be just as strong as yours...now why would you not believe him?

A Muslim is a fideist and claims no reason for his belief. Islam directly says that miracles are not proofs for anything and rejects them, relying on faith alone without justificaiton to accept revelation.

Quote:
I mean a muslim will tell you he has positive knowledge that Allah is God almighty with muhammed being his prophet who rose to heaven on a horse. You would then say, well that's silly why do you believe that? And the muslim would reply, it's in the Qu'ran, the oldest text there is and it's true. Why wouldn't, you then believe him?

I am not proving anything from Scripture. I am proving the truth of Scripture by external authority from miracles.

Quote:
Then why is it mentioned as the probable cause in the abstract, then if that's the case, the whole article is crap.

Wonderful. Just reject the article.

Quote:
No, because it has not been proven that it was prayer that did the healing.

And it has not been proven that prayer did not accomplish the healing. Likewise, medical science did not bring about the healing. Nor, does it seem, did the immune system. I never claimed miracles were absolutely certain, but they establish these truths with a reasonable degree of certainty.

Quote:
Plus, another study has shown that prayer does not work.

No, it did not. Regardless, the prayer here is extraordinary in character. It is not just prayer in general, as in the study.

Quote:

And..this is only ONE semi-documented case... which is not credible anyway.

There are many others. That just happens to be one I know is accessible. Every miracle performed for the canonization of saints is recorded and kept on record, with documentation.

Quote:

Also, it is the default position of the theist, to default to god doing it whenever they cannot explain something.

No, we don't. However, the lack of ordinary explanation points with reasonable certainty to a supernatural cause. I never claimed miracles to be absolute proofs, but they do establish good and reasonable grounds to hold the belief so that the belief is not contrary to reason.

Quote:
Then the good doctor is not being honest with himself or the study he has conducted, and I"m still having a hard time finding the actual article..hmm...could it be that at a university setting, they decided to trash it based on the fact that it's not scientific? I'm wondering why this would have even gone through peer review.

Just rejecting the article is not a good and rational way to go, either.

Quote:

I've seen secular magicians pull better tricks...man....

Also a good reason it is not a trick.

Quote:

Not scientifically viable. The only true test is to open it and see. What are they afraid of anyway? It's divine in nature no human could possibly undermine the validity of Gods' divine intention. right?

The blood is not divine. It is the blood of a saint, so it is holy, but not God's blood. Also, the test does give my position credibility, regardless. Lastly, I suppose their intentions are that such opening would ruin the blood. I cannot claim secret knowledge of their intentions, but I doubt it is malicious as they are allowing scientific tests in the first place. If it was an intentional hoax, they wouldn't allow people with scientific instruments to come near it at all.

Quote:

I'll gladly wait for that..by the way so you know.....I've been to that exact church and have seen it first hand. They keep the vial so far away from the people, it's really hard to discern what's in that thing. It's cloudy and murky..and really you can't really tell whether it's solid or liquid. Most people take the priests' word for it. On..well...faith.

That doesn't change the fact that it has been liquified in the presence of skeptics who have had a chance to verify the fact. Just because you did not see it yourself does not mean it did not happen. Just because I never saw the battle of Gettysburg doesn't mean it never happened.

Quote:

A human heart is a human heart....no matter who's it is..it all looks alike.

No they do not. In the monstrance, it would be easily visible if the heart flesh were different at different times.

Quote:
I bet you I can prove without the shadow of a doubt that the moon is not made of green cheese. here you go: http://www.neiu.edu/~jmhemzac/mooncomp.htm

That is only probable evidence, not absolute proof. I can still have a doubt that space monkeys switched the rocks. Or that the moon landing was faked and the moon rocks were manufactured in a NASA laboratory. Or that the Clementine mission was merely an attempt to keep the green cheese to themselves. I mean, green cheese would be a huge market.

Quote:
And you compare oranges to apples. Plus, the moon studies are on going my friend....we have the technology to study the moon and other planets without actually having to have to go there. So your point, although, well taken, is moot.

You cannot prove beyond doubt that the moon is made of green cheese. It is and can only be probable knowledge that you are taking on trust of other people's scientific efforts. I am not saying it is the case that the moon is really made of green cheese, or that the belief that it is is rational, but am only pointing out that this likewise requires faith.

Quote:
But yet, you deny the very "reasonable" explanations for the existence of Allah as the true god or Zeus, or any of the other 3000+ gods out there.

First, we know, as I pointed to above, the fact that natural reason can prove the existence of one God. Not these 3000 or however many gods. Likewise, it can eliminate them.
Second, it is not reasonable to assume Zeus', or any one elses, agency in a miracle that supports a different belief system.

Quote:
And this report was written by, an unbiased, independent inquiry?

I would argue so.

Quote:
and you know god limits his power by his own choice, because you have first hand knowledge of this? Are you now saying you know god's will? but I thought you said you didn't know god's will. Well what is it here do you or don't you? I mean certainly, it seems as if on the one hand you claim ignorance of god's will, but now you're telling me you know for a fact god limits his powers by his own will? you know god's will?

No, God's own nature "limits" God's will according to certain absolute limits. Any action outside of these is just nonsense. It can never happen nor exist.

Quote:
So god uses evil for good. That's an interesting twist on God's will..

God tolerates an evil and brings about a greater good.

Quote:
So now you're saying god does not know when we will be committing evil, so then that does kind of prove that he is not omniscient right? You said it now..... there is no NEED for him to know...therefore he doesn't? But if he doesn't then by definition he cannot be omniscient.

No, I am saying that if He knows that we will commit evil, it does not impose necessity on me actually committing evil. His knowing I will do so does not mean the same thing as causing me to commit evil.

Quote:
Right....and again..the best being...... war, hatred, bigotry, environmental rape, misogyny, suffering...etc..etc..etc...

These are merely tolerated by God. They are evils and great evils. But God tolerates them so that by this suffering, more souls are saved and more people are happy in the end. Likewise, He rectifies all this at the final judgement.

Quote:
Why would christ need to conquer suffering? he created it.

God never created suffering. Original sin caused suffering and death.

Quote:

general, but not individually.

And you have this partial knowledge..through......oh yeah wait, the vatican and the bible..forgot... circles (gettin' dizzy).


I don't know the specific plan God has for you or me. I know the general plan that He loves us and wants to save us, ect.

Quote:
Really? Because it seems to me that Mia Colpa seems to be the way of the catholic church.

Yes, we acknowledge our sins and are forgiven them. Repentance is a step toward forgiveness.

Quote:
But I have to disagree with you that becoming a priest will help out...but...anyway....

And I do as well.

Quote:
I think religion is a cop-out to thinking.

I think religion is a perfection to thinking.

Quote:
So then evil is a force of it's own volition? Did god create gravity? what about van der waals forces?

Evil is a privation, a defect, a lack of being. It doesn't exist in its own right.

Quote:
Ah..the second coming. The every so awaited joyous moment when the righteous fly to the sky...Israel is burned to the ground..and the rest of us are stuck here on earth as hell engulfs us all..... you mean that second coming?

I don't know where you get some of that. Israel is reestablished as the New Jerusalem in the Scriptures. Further, God's second coming establishes true justice. That is the point. If people are burning, their free choices earned them that position. The same is true of those who are rewarded.

Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom,
StMichael

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.