How do non-Catholics explain Eucharistic miracles, such as bleeding, and Marian...

[Rhamiel]

If, as many Catholic posters on this thread have asserted, the wafer in the Catholic mass becomes physical flesh and the wine becomes physical blood, all one needs to do is attend a mass and take a bit of each from the mass and have them tested for human DNA. It could hardly be more simple and it would put the question to rest.

Of course, however, the Catholic Church has backed away from that assertion and now, as MoreCoffee has explained, teaches that the bread actually does remain physically bread and the wine does remain physically wine, even though it is really and truly the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ. Go figure.

um, we have always known that the bread and wine keep the same appearance that they had before
why do you think that a DNA test would be able to detect the transformation when our own eyes do not show the transformation?

it keeps the Accidents of bread and wine
basically it keeps the "adjectives" associated with bread and wine
as bread, the Host was white and round, as the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, the Host is white and round

you can not have a pound of "round" or "white" it is not a thing
things can be white and round, you can have white paint, or white powder, but there is no thing
so as Catholics have known for thousands of years, the Accidents or adjectives stay the same
the properties stay the same
what it is changes, the adjectives stay the same
so yeah, you can desecrate the Host and subject it to any test you want
it will respond just like any piece of unleavened bread would
In His Passion, Jesus was expected to preform great shows at the beck and call of King Herod as well
Jesus is the King of Kings, not a dancing monkey sent to preform for you when you demand it

 

[Sword of the Lord]

I am not sure what you are calling a false allegation. Your OP is quoted below. It specifically asks about apparitions that are confirmed with science.

So... I take it you don't see that period after the sentence about apparitions, and just before Eucharistic? You don't see "scientific evidence" is the very sentence speaking of Eucharistic miracles and NOT in the apparition sentence? Really?

Protestants: forever making things say what they want.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Sir, it is the faithful members of your own Church here at CF who are seriously misrepresenting the teaching of the Catholic Church in vigorously asserting that the bread becomes actual, physical flesh in the mass and the wine becomes actual, physical blood

Who has made that assertion? Who has stated that the host becomes physical flesh made of meat and loses its appearance as bread and the properties of bread? Who has asserted that the contents of the chalice becomes physical blood and loses its appearance as wine and the properties of wine? Be specific because I doubt that any Catholic asserts such things especially because the very word "transubstantiation" is defined as a change of substance while the accidents remain unchanged. Only in the case of Eucharistic miracles - special miracles associated with the Holy Eucharist - will one ever find a claim that the host or the chalice changed not only in substance but also in accidents. And since such special miracles are not cases of transubstantiation but rather of total transformation your previous comments were and remain in error.

. I suggest that you correct their error first before attempting to yank the plank out of my eye.

Planks and eyes have nothing to do with my previous post. What you wrote was both inaccurate and highly offensive. It ought to be a matter of shame rather than an occasion for blame shifting.

 

[Albion]

Protestants: forever making things say what they want.

As a joke, that's really a good one, considering that this whole thread is an attempt to force agreement to the idea that various religious hoaxes have supposedly been proven "scientifically."

You did mean it as a joke, didn't you?

 

[Stryder06]

SOMETHING is happening. But what?

Deception.

And I saw coming out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet, three unclean spirits like frogs; 14for they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them together for the war of the great day of God, the Almighty.…

 

[Albion]

um, we have always known that the bread and wine keep the same appearance that they had before
why do you think that a DNA test would be able to detect the transformation when our own eyes do not show the transformation?

What you mean, I take it, is that a DNA test would be fooled just as our eyes and taste buds allegedly are. In this case, then, there is no way of proving Transubstantiation, meaning that it isn't actually a miracle as people normally think of miracles. For example, if I say that, with a wave of my hand, New York City has ceased to exist except that it still SEEMS to be there, you probably wouldn't call that a miracle, would you?

That being said, I think we need to get away from this "nature of the Eucharist" line of thought and back to the miracles that the OP had in mind.

 

[Rev Randy]

Deception.

And I saw coming out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet, three unclean spirits like frogs; 14for they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them together for the war of the great day of God, the Almighty.…

And that's what they said about the miracles Jesus performed.
Matt 12:24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.

25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:

26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?

I figured that was a good place to stop but it does get a bit more intense.
Best not to even speak of things we don't understand. Let alone add an accusatory tone to something that may be of God. If I don't pay attention to something some view as a miracle I may be inattentive at the most. If I accuse it of being a deception of the devil, I could be in danger of being guilty of something much greater.

 

[Albion]

And that's what they said about the miracles Jesus performed.
Matt 12:24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.

The miracles performed by Jesus--and what some said against them--has nothing to do with the incidents we are discussing here.

 

[Lion King]

And that's what they said about the miracles Jesus performed.
Matt 12:24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.

25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:

26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?

I figured that was a good place to stop but it does get a bit more intense.
Best not to even speak of things we don't understand. Let alone add an accusatory tone to something that may be of God. If I don't pay attention to something some view as a miracle I may be inattentive at the most. If I accuse it of being a deception of the devil, I could be in danger of being guilty of something much greater.

Except Jesus Christ's miracles were proven to be from God.

Can you prove the so-called miracle at Fatima is from God?

 

[MoreCoffee]

And that's what they said about the miracles Jesus performed.
Matt 12:24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.

25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:

26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?

I figured that was a good place to stop but it does get a bit more intense.
Best not to even speak of things we don't understand. Let alone add an accusatory tone to something that may be of God. If I don't pay attention to something some view as a miracle I may be inattentive at the most. If I accuse it of being a deception of the devil, I could be in danger of being guilty of something much greater.

Wise words, my dear brother. None should be hasty to denounce a message as Satanic when the message calls the faithful to worship God, live godly lives, pray, and seek the good of their fellow human beings in the blessings of God. That is why saint Paul informs us that nobody (speaking through a spiritual gift) will say "Jesus is accursed" and equally none (speaking through a spiritual gift) can say "Jesus is Lord" except if they speak by the Spirit of God.

Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking by the Spirit of God ever says "Jesus be cursed!" and no one can say "Jesus is Lord" except by the Holy Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:3)​

 

[Rev Randy]

The miracles performed by Jesus--and what some said against them--has nothing to do with the incidents we are discussing here.

Could be. They are either of God or not of God. As I have not personally inspected them I prefer not to take a hardline stand either way.
It makes about as much sense as writing a book report on a book I have never read but merely heard of.

 

[Rev Randy]

Except Jesus Christ's miracles were proven to be from God.

Can you prove the so-called miracle at Fatima is from God?

It's not my place to prove a miracle. Now tell me who "proved" that the miracles Jesus performed were of God? Seems a lot of earthly people have seen no proof.
I may test a miracle but I cannot prove it. Faith is the only evidence but that's not proof.

 

[Albion]

Could be. They are either of God or not of God. As I have not personally inspected them I prefer not to take a hardline stand either way.

Very well, I agree to that explanation. Both are alleged to be miracles. You say you can't take a stand one way or the other on the ones Jesus is reported to have performed. If that is your conviction, then of course your position is logically correct.

I, however, assumed that we all believe the Biblical miracles to be genuine for the reason that we believe in the Bible as God's word. Was that my mistake?

It makes about as much sense as writing a book report on a book I have never read but merely heard of.

The Gideons will get you one in a jiffy.

 

[Albion]

It's not my place to prove a miracle.

Then what is your purpose in posting in this thread? You want us to know that you don't know what to think about the topic????

 

[Rev Randy]

Very well, I agree to that explanation. Both are alleged to be miracles. You say you can't take a stand one way or the other on the ones Jesus is reported to have performed. If that is your conviction, then of course your position is logically correct.

I, however, assumed that we all believe the Biblical miracles to be genuine for the reason that we believe in the Bible as God's word. Was that my mistake?


The Gideons will get you one in a jiffy.

Nope. You read me wrong. I do take a stand on faith concerning the miracles reported in scripture. I said I cannot prove them scientifically (or that was my meaning) to an unbeliever.
I don't pay a lot of attention to modern miracles I have not witnessed. I don't require a sign.
Please don't sic the gideons on me.

 

[Rev Randy]

Then what is your purpose in posting in this thread? You want us to know that you don't know what to think about the topic????

I found the posts saying it was evil deception a bit troubling.
I believe in miracles. I just don't require more to help my belief.If some do then it could explain much about these events. Why did Jesus perform miracles? Was it not to help people who required a sign to believe?

 

[Stryder06]

And that's what they said about the miracles Jesus performed.
Matt 12:24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.

25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:

26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?

They said this not because they thought it was true, but because their hearts were hardened against the truth.

I figured that was a good place to stop but it does get a bit more intense.
Best not to even speak of things we don't understand. Let alone add an accusatory tone to something that may be of God. If I don't pay attention to something some view as a miracle I may be inattentive at the most. If I accuse it of being a deception of the devil, I could be in danger of being guilty of something much greater.

I don't have to worry about it being from God. I know it isn't which is why I can say what I did, and will continue to do so. He asked what it could be, and I explained it from the scripture.

I don't think I'll ever understand how so many warnings are given about being deceived, and none are heeded because of the off chance they might offend someone. If Satan showed up hollering and screaming that he was going to kill all christians, showing himself for who he truly was, what chance do you think he'd stand at deceiving others? Deception works best under a cloak of legitimacy.

 

[Albion]

Please don't sic the gideons on me.

All right, but I've always found them to be quite easy going. If you want their New Testaments, they're are happy to offer them, and if you don't, they smile and let it go at that. Without any apparent resentment, they take the sneers of skeptics who comment while passing by, and they seem to be content to do this day after day with little way of knowing how much of an effect this approach to evangelism is having. I assume that they must pay a lot for the thousands of books they distribute each year, and they never weaken. I mean, how many other religious campaigns have quietly ground along like this for --well, my whole lifetime, it seems--with so little fanfare?

(Sorry for the sermon. I was just thinking "aloud.")

 

[Stryder06]

Wise words, my dear brother. None should be hasty to denounce a message as Satanic when the message calls the faithful to worship God, live godly lives, pray, and seek the good of their fellow human beings in the blessings of God. That is why saint Paul informs us that nobody (speaking through a spiritual gift) will say "Jesus is accursed" and equally none (speaking through a spiritual gift) can say "Jesus is Lord" except if they speak by the Spirit of God.

Who's being hasty? It doesn't matter if the message given calls peeople to pray, worship, and live a godly life if the way they've been taught to pray, worship and live is wholly incorrect. All that ends up doing is calling people to walk down the wrong road with greater haste.

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world

 

[Stryder06]

I found the posts saying it was evil deception a bit troubling.

Why? I find it more disturbing that so many individuals are willing to accept whatever they see as a "miracle" to be heaven sent.

Why did Jesus perform miracles? Was it not to help people who required a sign to believe?

I actually believe that Jesus performed miracles simply out of love. Probably why you would help someone who fell stand back up again. You're not doing it to convince them that you're a nice person, you're doing it because it's within your power to do so, and because you simply love that individual as a child of God.