The undeniable miracle at Fatima

[pocaracas]

Muslim unrotten http://www.rightfulreligion.com/en132_fr...1400-years

So much for the "only Catholics get incorruptibles"

[Harry Nevis]

Muslim unrotten http://www.rightfulreligion.com/en132_fr...1400-years

So much for the "only Catholics get incorruptibles"

I particularly like how he states there is blood flowing through these bodies' veins. What a rube.

[Catholic_Lady]

The phenomenon certainly is NOT confined to Catholics. There are obvious natural explanations, including secret mummification, which the RCC has been known to do; and climate and soil conditions.


There are hundreds of naturally well-preserved human corpses in the world, if not thousands. Scientists seem not to have gotten the memo that they defy science at all, let alone completely.

Mr. Agenda,

You have obviously done ZERO research on incorruptibles. Preserved bodies discovered over the centuries fall under 2 categories: accidentally preserved (i.e. through radioactivity or being buried in sand) or intentionally preserved (through some type of embalming). In BOTH cases, these bodies are dark brown, distorted, rigid, shriveled up like a piece of jerky, and have a bad odor as you would expect. The examples you give fall under one of these two categories.

The incorruptibles on the other hand do not fall under either category - they are not embalmed. Yet they are LIFELIKE, flexible, have flowing blood, and don't have a bad odor. This after years or even centuries underground, and even buried in proximity to other bodies that are not incorrupt. Every time one of these incorruptibles has been found, it has been determined that person was a devout Catholic. If you disagree with me, show me even ONE photo of a lifelike incorruptible that is not a Catholic. You will not find one.

---

I can't speak for everyone but I'm not saying there was a string of coincidences.  Watch the video I posted, people are already convinced at what is going to happen and you can't tell them otherwise.

As Catholic lady stated, the people who arrived in Fatima that day were only told that a miracle would happen "to make the people believe". They had no idea it had anything to do with the sun. So they obviously weren't "already convinced on what was going to happen".

---

Maybe I missed this thread, but the so-called "miracle" was LATE, by 20 minutes or so!  It had been raining all morning, and around 1:30 local time, people started getting antsy.  Lucia, seeing the clouds starting to clear, started screaming, "Look at the Sun, look at the Sun!!!"  The crowd complied, and they saw what they wanted to see; HOWEVER, some individuals there, believers included, disavowed any supernatural occurrences of any kind!!

So if the miracle happened at 12 noon you would believe it, but if it happened at 12:20 that invalidates all the testimonials and we can disregard the whole thing? You crack me up.

"They saw what they wanted to see"? As previously posted, no one knew what was going to happen that day - they were just told it would be a miracle. Funny, all the testimonials agree the same thing happened!

And there we have another baseless claim that some people there didn't see anything. The testimonials say the opposite.

Yep, and people were "expecting" something to happen at 12pm Portugal time, not at solar noon (which was at 1pm).

[Mister Agenda]

Perhaps it sounds likely to you that this was a sun dog/sun hole that happened to magically fall on the same day and time as predicted months before hand, and mass hallucination of the same thing at the same time (even though nothing about the sun was even expected), along with clothes and puddles drying up impossibly fast. It doesn't sound likely to me at all. I think it sounds extremely far fetched. 

I take pride in being honest with myself and in being objective. So the accusations of some people here (not you Agenda) that I'm simply making myself believe because I am desperate to do so comes very unappreciated.

No magic is needed for a sun dog/sun halo to fall on a particular day. It's not even particularly coincidental. They're very common, as I have said multiple times. Magic IS needed for the version you believe to be true.

I don't think you're being desperate. Since you already accept the existence of supernatural occurrences, that is bound to affect your assessment of the probability of one having occurred. I think you're particularly mistaken in this case (lots of Christians don't believe this one either), but I get why it seems reasonable to you.

[ohreally]

[quote pid='1600586' dateline='1502402403']

---

I can't speak for everyone but I'm not saying there was a string of coincidences.  Watch the video I posted, people are already convinced at what is going to happen and you can't tell them otherwise.

As Catholic lady stated, the people who arrived in Fatima that day were only told that a miracle would happen "to make the people believe". They had no idea it had anything to do with the sun. So they obviously weren't "already convinced on what was going to happen".

---

[/quote]


Exactly, they were told a miracle would happen, and all they could come up was this pathetic story of the sun dancing.  This is why psychics are fake, they leave it so open ended that you fill in the details to make it true.      What does dancing even mean?  Line, interpretive, nude?  
Plus less than 1% of the people who were there documented they saw a miracle.

[Brian37]

Perhaps it sounds likely to you that this was a sun dog/sun hole that happened to magically fall on the same day and time as predicted months before hand, and mass hallucination of the same thing at the same time (even though nothing about the sun was even expected), along with clothes and puddles drying up impossibly fast. It doesn't sound likely to me at all. I think it sounds extremely far fetched. 

I take pride in being honest with myself and in being objective. So the accusations of some people here (not you Agenda) that I'm simply making myself believe because I am desperate to do so comes very unappreciated.

No magic is needed for a sun dog/sun halo to fall on a particular day. It's not even particularly coincidental. They're very common, as I have said multiple times. Magic IS needed for the version you believe to be true.

I don't think you're being desperate. Since you already accept the existence of supernatural occurrences, that is bound to affect your assessment of the probability of one having occurred. I think you're particularly mistaken in this case (lots of Christians don't believe this one either), but I get why it seems reasonable to you.

As much shit as I give theists, of all labels, it really has never been for me to rid the world of them. I have said many times that I do value my species potential to display empathy, cooperation and compassion. I will always value that POTENTIAL. But since we know we are a flawed species when it comes to the logic we try to sell others, I cannot watch and say nothing when it is claimed. It is not a rights issue for me, not one bit. Even if your claims make me want to pull my hair out, while I may be blunt about it, I will not judge the individual, but merely that claim on that subject.

My point is I agree. As nice as CL has been to me, it still amounts to her not considering it is merely something she wants to be true. But, to be fair to her, that is same with most of the world's population. There was a time long ago, when I could have bought what she still buys. It does not make her evil that she does. But what you and I are saying is while understandable, it is still not matching what science says. In reality, the sun does not behave the way the claimers claim.

I still like her outside these claims. Anyone who has not demanded my lynching deserves a Purple Heart. I know I am a pain in the ass.

[Jehanne]

[quote pid='1601058' dateline='1502478131']
So if the miracle happened at 12 noon you would believe it, but if it happened at 12:20 that invalidates all the testimonials and we can disregard the whole thing? You crack me up.

"They saw what they wanted to see"? As previously posted, no one knew what was going to happen that day - they were just told it would be a miracle. Funny, all the testimonials agree the same thing happened!

And there we have another baseless claim that some people there didn't see anything. The testimonials say the opposite.

Various claims have been made as to what actually happened during the event. According to many witnesses, after a period of rain, the dark clouds broke and the sun appeared as an opaque, spinning disc in the sky. It was said to be significantly duller than normal, and to cast multicolored lights across the landscape, the people, and the surrounding clouds. The sun was then reported to have careened towards the earth before zig-zagging back to its normal position.[19] Witnesses reported that their previously wet clothes became "suddenly and completely dry, as well as the wet and muddy ground that had been previously soaked because of the rain that had been falling".[20] Not all witnesses reported seeing the sun "dance". Some people only saw the radiant colors, and others, including some believers, saw nothing at all.[21][22][23][24] The only known picture of the sun taken during the event doesn't show anything unusual.[9][10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_Sun

[Catholic_Lady]

[quote pid='1601058' dateline='1502478131']
So if the miracle happened at 12 noon you would believe it, but if it happened at 12:20 that invalidates all the testimonials and we can disregard the whole thing? You crack me up.

"They saw what they wanted to see"? As previously posted, no one knew what was going to happen that day - they were just told it would be a miracle. Funny, all the testimonials agree the same thing happened!

And there we have another baseless claim that some people there didn't see anything. The testimonials say the opposite.

Various claims have been made as to what actually happened during the event. According to many witnesses, after a period of rain, the dark clouds broke and the sun appeared as an opaque, spinning disc in the sky. It was said to be significantly duller than normal, and to cast multicolored lights across the landscape, the people, and the surrounding clouds. The sun was then reported to have careened towards the earth before zig-zagging back to its normal position.[19] Witnesses reported that their previously wet clothes became "suddenly and completely dry, as well as the wet and muddy ground that had been previously soaked because of the rain that had been falling".[20] Not all witnesses reported seeing the sun "dance". Some people only saw the radiant colors, and others, including some believers, saw nothing at all.[21][22][23][24] The only known picture of the sun taken during the event doesn't show anything unusual.[9][10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_Sun

What he's saying is that what was seen by all these people was in regards to the sun. Obviously people's descriptions/experiences may vary slightly, but that's the case anytime you're hearing an account of something from thousands of different people. 
The point is, if all these people were making up something or having hallucinations simply because they were "expecting" a miracle, then maybe one person would have said they saw the Virgin Mary... another would say they saw Jesus.... someone else may say they saw an angel... another person would say a flying pig, etc. You get the point. But all the accounts, which were thousands, were in regards to the sun changing colors and/or moving around in the sky, and all happened at the same time. I don't see how it is at all reasonable to conclude that all these people were having the same hallucination at the same time (which wasn't even the time they were expecting to see anything), or that they were all lying and somehow their lies all coincidentally happened to be the same.    
As for those who didn't see anything? To me, it really only makes it more convincing that this was a supernatural occurrence. Not everyone is gifted with being witness to a miracle. If the sun truly was changing colors and moving in a natural phenomenon, I assume everyone would have seen it.

[Jehanne]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_Sun

What he's saying is that what was seen by all these people was in regards to the sun. Obviously people's descriptions/experiences may vary slightly, but that's the case anytime you're hearing an account of something from thousands of different people. 
The point is, if all these people were making up something or having hallucinations simply because they were "expecting" a miracle, then maybe one person would have said they saw the Virgin Mary... another would say they saw Jesus.... someone else may say they saw an angel... another person would say a flying pig, etc. You get the point. But all the accounts, which were thousands, were in regards to the sun changing colors and/or moving around in the sky, and all happened at the same time. I don't see how it is at all reasonable to conclude that all these people were having the same hallucination at the same time (which wasn't even the time they were expecting to see anything), or that they were all lying and somehow their lies all coincidentally happened to be the same.    
As for those who didn't see anything? To me, it really only makes it more convincing that this was a supernatural occurrence. Not everyone is gifted with being witness to a miracle. If the sun truly was changing colors and moving in a natural phenomenon, I assume everyone would have seen it.

A good assumption!  And, of course, astronomical observations were in full-bloom and they all saw nothing, and so, the phenomenon was a local one, no?  But, keep reading the Wiki article:

In The Evidence for Visions of the Virgin Mary Kevin McClure wrote that the crowd at Cova da Iria may have been expecting to see signs in the sun, since similar phenomena had been reported in the weeks leading up to the miracle. On this basis, he believes that the crowd saw what it wanted to see. McClure also stated that he had never seen such a collection of contradictory accounts of a case in any of the research that he had done in the previous ten years.[10]

According to theologian Lisa J. Schwebel, claims of the miracle present a number of difficulties. Schwebel states, "not only did not all those present not see the phenomenon, but also there are considerable inconsistencies among witnesses as to what they did see". Schwebel also observes that there is no authentic photo of the solar phenomena claimed, "despite the presence of hundreds of reporters and photographers at the field" and one photo often presented as authentic is actually "a solar eclipse in another part of the world taken sometime before 1917".[42]

And, so, perfectly natural explanations exist, and by Occam's Razor, we ought to go with those!  You might want to focus on the so-called "Miracle" of Calanda, but I have some responses for that one, also!

[WinterHold]

Point is: personal experiences don't stand up probably without a proof.
Also; they are not a key in the belief in God or not.

I think such stories just put us closer to losing direction as believers in God. In one second one is on a verse revealed by God; in the next they're on a twisted tale of something never happened.

Counting on these stories is not logical.