|
|
Post by mslo79 on Aug 12, 2019 8:40:56 GMT
...and yet people still deny God's existence with miracles like this in the world 
|
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Aug 12, 2019 9:41:26 GMT
I remember from one of his interviews that Fr. Malachi Martin regarded Guadalupe as a legitimate miracle.
|
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Aug 13, 2019 6:34:42 GMT
I remember from one of his interviews that Fr. Malachi Martin regarded Guadalupe as a legitimate miracle.
Yeah, just the fact it survived so long (i.e. it's nearly 500 years old as it was the year 1531) has to count for a lot regardless of the rest of the stuff talked about in the video because that alone is miraculous given they say that kind of material typically deteriorates in a much shorter period of time, like roughly 30 years or so tops. so to make it nearly 500 and it's still going strong, it's going to be difficult for someone to deny that it's just some ordinary event. then you got the coloring holding up etc etc which makes it even harder to deny as no human can make a image like that.
so given all of the info on it, seems to be a pretty clear cut miracle. but yet many still don't believe, or maybe they just don't want to because then they might have to change their lives etc. but as usual, it pretty much comes back to my typical quote... "To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible." - St. Thomas Aquinas ; because it seems no matter what level of proof you give them, they will conjure up any BS excuse to deny it (either this or others like Our Lady of Las Lajas (image on a rock from 1754 were the image is part of the rock structure) etc) even though looking at the facts, it's more likely something is legitimate, then not. so they don't have much reason to deny, but they do anyways. it's like God could come down and say to humanity, "hey humanity, it's Me God. I exist". they would write it off as some sort of mass hallucination. lol
p.s. but from a quick look online... Our Lady of Guadalupe image was approved by the Catholic church it seems in the year 1895.
|
|
|
|
Post by progressiveelement on Sept 12, 2019 1:26:15 GMT
A miracle with convenient timing and location.
😇
|
|
|
|
Post by ᵗʰᵉᵃᵘˣᵖʰᵒᵘ on Sept 12, 2019 8:21:17 GMT
Yep, that’s all the proof of a gigantic sky man anyone needs. Wow! Thanks! * t o t a l l y c o n v i n c e d *  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2019 11:01:52 GMT
A painting done in the 16th century is NOT evidence of God.
|
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Sept 12, 2019 11:08:01 GMT
...and yet people still deny God's existence with miracles like this in the world Your bottomless ignorance and gullibility have been duly noted.
|
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on Sept 12, 2019 21:00:27 GMT
...and yet people still deny God's existence with miracles like this in the world Your bottomless ignorance and gullibility have been duly noted.
|
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Sept 12, 2019 21:23:19 GMT
I remember from one of his interviews that Fr. Malachi Martin regarded Guadalupe as a legitimate miracle. Yeah, just the fact it survived so long (i.e. it's nearly 500 years old as it was the year 1531) has to count for a lot From the image it doesn't seem to be in anything like pristine condition, with obvious effects of time on the surface and a crack etc. Why would God only partially preserve it? Perhaps His power wears off after a while. He also seems to have done a better job with many of the other paintings around the world which have also survived from the period although He doesn't seem to think much of the much greater work The Last Supper which has decayed quite badly ..
|
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Sept 27, 2019 5:53:52 GMT
@sean It's not a painting as to quote another website which is a great counter to what you just accused it of being, a painting... so you are going to have to do MUCH better than that to deny it  faustus5 And yet you can't say why those (Our Lady of Guadalupe image from the year 1531 (and Eucharistic Miracles etc)) are not legitimate because there is more in favor of them being legitimate than against them to say the least as even if you don't believe God, they defy nature/science and that has to count for something even to your atheist mind. or ill ask you this, what's more likely... those being some random act of nature that's yet to be explained or that they are legitimate testimony to God's existence and are what the Catholic church says they are, which are basically legitimate miracles from God? p.s. but like that St. Thomas Aquinas quote I always post basically says... those without faith will basically conjure up any BS excuse to deny God's existence even when faced with evidence that's at least plausible for God's existence. |
|
|
|
Post by ᵗʰᵉᵃᵘˣᵖʰᵒᵘ on Sept 27, 2019 7:41:21 GMT
@sean It's not a painting as to quote another website which is a great counter to what you just accused it of being, a painting... so you are going to have to do MUCH better than that to deny it faustus5 And yet you can't say why those (Our Lady of Guadalupe image from the year 1531 (and Eucharistic Miracles etc)) are not legitimate because there is more in favor of them being legitimate than against them to say the least as even if you don't believe God, they defy nature/science and that has to count for something even to your atheist mind. or ill ask you this, what's more likely... those being some random act of nature that's yet to be explained or that they are legitimate testimony to God's existence and are what the Catholic church says they are, which are basically legitimate miracles from God? p.s. but like that St. Thomas Aquinas quote I always post basically says... those without faith will basically conjure up any BS excuse to deny God's existence even when faced with evidence that's at least plausible for God's existence.
"those with faith will basically conjure up any BS excuse to confirm God's existence even when faced with no evidence."
|
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Sept 27, 2019 9:55:43 GMT
And yet you can't say why those (Our Lady of Guadalupe image from the year 1531 (and Eucharistic Miracles etc)) are not legitimate because there is more in favor of them being legitimate than against them to say the least as even if you don't believe God, they defy nature/science and that has to count for something even to your atheist mind. There is nothing in favor of them being legitimate. You have no intellectual standards to speak of. And you can barely write coherent English sentences, let alone think coherent thoughts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2019 10:56:34 GMT
@sean It's not a painting as to quote another website which is a great counter to what you just accused it of being, a painting... so you are going to have to do MUCH better than that to deny it. Firstly, it's fibres have been tested in a laboratory. It is NOT made of cactus fibre, which lasts decades. It is made of hemp, which lasts centuries. So... It has naturally survived. Nothing miraculous about the cloth, at all. Miracle debunked, sorry. We can go further if you want? The paint you claim isn't paint, has been proved to be (drumroll please)... PAINT! |
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Sept 27, 2019 11:15:59 GMT
@sean It's not a painting as to quote another website which is a great counter to what you just accused it of being, a painting... so you are going to have to do MUCH better than that to deny it. Firstly, it's fibres have been tested in a laboratory. It is NOT made of cactus fibre, which lasts decades. It is made of hemp, which lasts centuries. So... It has naturally survived. Nothing miraculous about the cloth, at all. Miracle debunked, sorry. We can go further if you want? The paint you claim isn't paint, has been proved to be (drumroll please)... PAINT! Wait you mean to say that all those prizes for conclusive evidence of the supernatural continue to be unclaimed? Shocking!!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2019 11:18:56 GMT
Firstly, it's fibres have been tested in a laboratory. It is NOT made of cactus fibre, which lasts decades. It is made of hemp, which lasts centuries. So... It has naturally survived. Nothing miraculous about the cloth, at all. Miracle debunked, sorry. We can go further if you want? The paint you claim isn't paint, has been proved to be (drumroll please)... PAINT! Wait you mean to say that all those prizes for conclusive evidence of the supernatural continue to be unclaimed? Shocking!!!! Sorry, yes. The fella who concocted the whole Lady of Guadalupe story was a prolific writer, it was just what he did... He even called his main protagonist Juan Diego, which is like calling your main character John Doe, nobody in particular. I guess he forgot to go back and give him a real name 🤔 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2019 11:40:17 GMT
mslo79I understand where you keep coming from. You see something you so badly want to be true. You tell everyone it is true, and is evidence of God. But when I look in to it, there is no truth to the claims. You have no concept of scientific theory and methods. There is no academic rigour to your claims, or the YouTube videos you promote... Just a load of wishy thinking, and make believe. And I say that as a Catholic, I was at Friday Mass this morning. Your starting point for claimed miracles needs to be skeptical... Is there a natural explanation for this? The Catholic priest tasked with investigating claimed cases of stigmata, concluded that there most likely hasn't been a genuine case since the original one of Francis himself in the 13th century. Live your faith... Get away from this need to try and 'prove' to other people you are right and they are wrong, with nonsense YouTube videos and wishy thinking. Or are you trying to convince yourself?
|
|
|
|
Post by You_Got_A_Stew_Goin_Baby on Sept 27, 2019 23:26:09 GMT
An Aztec goddess that eventually came to be associated with the Virgin Mary. The earliest reports from the Spanish clergy in New Spain weren’t too pleased with the veneration of the Virgin of Guadalupe, but eventually they acquiesced. Given the difficulties they were having subduing Chichimecas and Tarascans to the north and west, the Spaniards probably figures that if the Mexica’s could be brought into the fold by morphing their old mother goddess into the Virgin than that was good enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Sept 28, 2019 9:25:46 GMT
bump for the parody  |
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Sept 28, 2019 9:51:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by fatpaul on Sept 28, 2019 10:38:13 GMT
mslo79 Lets just say for argument sake that I believe miracles do and have occurred, what process would have occurred that explains divine/deistic intervention? I'm genuinely interested in how a deity could initiate such miracles because, just like I would need some explanation of the natural for such events to not be a miracle, I need some explanation of the non-natural/divine for such events to be a miracle. Saying such events are miraculous by virtue of being inexplicable is still no explanation for anything whether natural or non-natural/divine.
|
|
