Eucharistic Miracle Buenos Aires, Argentina

[steve b]

Originally Posted by atheistgirl

They didn't have the cameras running the whole time and they didn't have multiple cameras covering every angle, from what I've read.

These are sceptics remember. They are trying to prove fraud, not the positive. You're not telling sceptics how to do their job of being sceptic are you?

Originally Posted by a

Easily sorted if they were fake to begin with.

That's the point of the documentary, to find out if they were fake. The wounds were real.

Originally Posted by a

It wasn't trying to.

It was highlighting why what they did wasn't even remotely scientific or thorough.

Findings from EEG, Cat scans, Forensic lab, biologists, Botonists isn't scientific enough? As you remember, the doctor doing the observation and evaluation was an atheist.

Originally Posted by a

I enjoyed his reaction when the priest was pretty nonplus about the whole thing lol.

As he said, our faith doesn't depend on these events, or them being true.

Originally Posted by a

BTW, I haven't a clue about youtube numbering and don't care.

I asked some people who know more about this stuff than I do, since I have more important and interesting things to do than record youtube video views and was told if you're not logged in to an account, views aren't recorded.

I was also told they can take some time to register.

I have no idea if that's accurate or not.

Here's a youtube, explaining youtube views - you might find it interesting.

I don't.

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

Oh, and another BTW - If you're going to post youtubes to appear to be helpful, then imply a person didn't look at them because of the numbering system you don't understand, when they just told you they have - don't bother in future.

It subtracts from what initially seemed like a helpful gesture, and your unfounded inference is less than charitable. In fact, some might go so far as to say down right insulting and offensive.

Not me though - I don't make assumptions about people, particularly people I don't know.

right back atcha



Sarah x

I already inserted a caveot, by saying "unless of course the numbering system for you tube isn't accurate."

[GaryTaylor]

Does everyone agree there are invisible Truths? Why then would the existence of God be so difficult to comprehend?

[peace2u2]

Originally Posted by PaxEtBonumFides

Hello!
I am looking for a DVD video about the Eucharistic Miracle Buenos Aires, Argentina. I`ve read that it is a 30 minutes documentary. I would like to buy this DVD but can`t find it on the internet. I also don`t know the exact name of the video.

I sincerely hope someone can help me.
I appreciate any help!

God`s peace and blessing to You all!

And this is not the first time this miracle has happened. See links below:

An 8th century monk struggling with the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist:

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucha.../lanciano.html

Others:

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucha...r/bolsena.html

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/blanot.html

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucha...r/holland.html

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/siena.html

There are probably countless miracles attributed to The Real Presence of Jesus in the Most Holy Eucharist.

We should share how Jesus has transformed our own hearts and all for His Glory so that all people will be led to salvation.

[atheistgirl]

Originally Posted by steve b

These are sceptics remember. They are trying to prove fraud, not the positive. You're not telling sceptics how to do their job of being sceptic are you?

Being a 'sceptic' is not a job description lol. Claiming to be scientific investigators is, and you can drive a train through their so called methodology. Their investigation is a joke, and has been exposed as such.

That's the point of the documentary, to find out if they were fake. The wounds were real.

There is no way to make that claim in the conditions. These should have been 'laboratory' type conditions with no possibility of deceit. The whole set up is just poor by any scientific investigatory standard.

So, no, the wounds could very easily be faked.

However, once again, off topic.

Findings from EEG, Cat scans, Forensic lab, biologists, Botonists isn't scientific enough? As you remember, the doctor doing the observation and evaluation was an atheist.

Atheism has nothing to do with the scientific method.

And seriously, a forensic lab tech telling us the blood is, wait for it ... Katya's .... (when she cut herself ) is just ... well ..... duh!

I already inserted a caveot, by saying "unless of course the numbering system for you tube isn't accurate."

No need for any caveat in the first place

Take a lesson from Graciew and others.

She wanted to be helpful and provided the information - end of story.

It's a much nicer way of dealing with people - certainly much better than to make what is at best uncharitable inferences, when you don't know the person, and don't even understand the methodology behind the system you're using to make the inference.

Despite appearing to be helpful, ultimately, it just makes the person doing so look bad.

However thanks to Graciew I have a direct contact now with the Church concerned and can continue with my own inquiries.

I'm particularly interested in the chain of custody, and why the name of the world famous respected forensic pathologist changed from Dr Zuigbe, to Dr Lawrence along with why whoever it actually was (assuming it was anyone at all!) didn't think to write up a word about it in a scientific medical or research paper - considering we're dealing with some world renowned forensic pathologist

They would have, after all, just witnessed science, medicine, and everything we know about death and human organ tissue turned on it's head, and yet, not a single peer reviewed research paper to be found - heck, not even a single article in a science or medical magazine. A search of The Lancet turns up nothing.

Sarah x

[Blacksword]

Originally Posted by atheistgirl

Shoot



I do, and I am



My enjoyment came close to being spoiled, until I found the ignore button

Generally though, you're right; I've engaged with some lovely, interesting, intelligent, kind and charitable people here, and have learned a ton of stuff. It's an ok place to hangout for sure



No. Before I could get even close, I'd need to be rationally convinced there's a Deity in the first place, then this Deity is the God of Christianity, then Catholicism is the full expression of the desire of this Deity.

Despite my best efforts, and the efforts of others I see no evidence for any kind of supernatural entity whatsoever.



You're not being invasive, you've not made me in the least uncomfortable, and I appreciate the question.

Sarah x

I'd agree with your points on the "miracle" being talked about here. Although I'd make one observation: perhaps you have not yet found evidence of an ultimate Creator because you're looking in the wrong places for such evidence?...not at all unlike the people who seek after these sorts of purported miracles. I'm skeptical of such claims as they seem to be made and/or accepted immediately by people who need such things to bolster their faith. Just some thoughts I had...

[GaryTaylor]

Originally Posted by atheistgirl

Being a 'sceptic' is not a job description lol. Claiming to be scientific investigators is, and you can drive a train through their so called methodology. Their investigation is a joke, and has been exposed as such.



There is no way to make that claim in the conditions. These should have been 'laboratory' type conditions with no possibility of deceit. The whole set up is just poor by any scientific investigatory standard.

So, no, the wounds could very easily be faked.

However, once again, off topic.



Atheism has nothing to do with the scientific method.

And seriously, a forensic lab tech telling us the blood is, wait for it ... Katya's .... (when she cut herself ) is just ... well ..... duh!



No need for any caveat in the first place

Take a lesson from Graciew and others.

She wanted to be helpful and provided the information - end of story.

It's a much nicer way of dealing with people - certainly much better than to make what is at best uncharitable inferences, when you don't know the person, and don't even understand the methodology behind the system you're using to make the inference.

Despite appearing to be helpful, ultimately, it just makes the person doing so look bad.

However thanks to Graciew I have a direct contact now with the Church concerned and can continue with my own inquiries.

I'm particularly interested in the chain of custody, and why the name of the world famous respected forensic pathologist changed from Dr Zuigbe, to Dr Lawrence along with why whoever it actually was (assuming it was anyone at all!) didn't think to write up a word about it in a scientific medical or research paper - considering we're dealing with some world renowned forensic pathologist

They would have, after all, just witnessed science, medicine, and everything we know about death and human organ tissue turned on it's head, and yet, not a single peer reviewed research paper to be found - heck, not even a single article in a science or medical magazine. A search of The Lancet turns up nothing.

Sarah x

Its being handled in a similar fashion as the USA handles UFOs. The change of Dr. might indicate a re-evaluation of what he thought he knew.

[atheistgirl]

Originally Posted by GaryTaylor

Its being handled in a similar fashion as the USA handles UFOs. The change of Dr. might indicate a re-evaluation of what he thought he knew.

Or perhaps a lawsuit when one found out his name was being used to promote something he never heard about or was involved in

I've asked the question. Still waiting for and open to the answer

Sarah x

[Julia Mae]

Originally Posted by atheistgirl

Or perhaps a lawsuit when one found out his name was being used to promote something he never heard about or was involved in

I've asked the question. Still waiting for and open to the answer

Sarah x

Hi, Sarah, I made a thread for you! And for a lot of people who'd like to talk about a miracle. Seems a popular topic. A Miracle for Atheistgirl (I didn't want to hijack this one.)

I saw that video and I had the same reaction you did. Except I would not expect the Vatican to have done anything, it would be unusual, and I understood that the chemical signature of the heart muscle was the same as live tissue, not that it was "beating." (It's been a while since I watched it.) But then, I didn't think much of the presentation for the same reasons you didn't.

[atheistgirl]

Originally Posted by Julia Mae

Hi, Sarah, I made a thread for you! And for a lot of people who'd like to talk about a miracle. Seems a popular topic. A Miracle for Atheistgirl (I didn't want to hijack this one.)

Julia Mae



Sarah x

[steve b]

Originally Posted by atheistgirl

Being a 'sceptic' is not a job description lol. Claiming to be scientific investigators is, and you can drive a train through their so called methodology. Their investigation is a joke, and has been exposed as such.



There is no way to make that claim in the conditions. These should have been 'laboratory' type conditions with no possibility of deceit. The whole set up is just poor by any scientific investigatory standard.

So, no, the wounds could very easily be faked.

However, once again, off topic.



Atheism has nothing to do with the scientific method.

And seriously, a forensic lab tech telling us the blood is, wait for it ... Katya's .... (when she cut herself ) is just ... well ..... duh!



No need for any caveat in the first place

Take a lesson from Graciew and others.

She wanted to be helpful and provided the information - end of story.

It's a much nicer way of dealing with people - certainly much better than to make what is at best uncharitable inferences, when you don't know the person, and don't even understand the methodology behind the system you're using to make the inference.

Despite appearing to be helpful, ultimately, it just makes the person doing so look bad.

However thanks to Graciew I have a direct contact now with the Church concerned and can continue with my own inquiries.

I'm particularly interested in the chain of custody, and why the name of the world famous respected forensic pathologist changed from Dr Zuigbe, to Dr Lawrence along with why whoever it actually was (assuming it was anyone at all!) didn't think to write up a word about it in a scientific medical or research paper - considering we're dealing with some world renowned forensic pathologist

They would have, after all, just witnessed science, medicine, and everything we know about death and human organ tissue turned on it's head, and yet, not a single peer reviewed research paper to be found - heck, not even a single article in a science or medical magazine. A search of The Lancet turns up nothing.

Sarah x

As I said previously, even if the Church approved any of these phenomina, it is not required by the Church to believe it. That's because none of these are required for our faith. Therefore I feel zero pressure to defend any of them to anyone whether sceptic or atheist etc etc etc.

What we are required to believe we must believe. Those I will defend. Recognizing that
“To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.” But I try anyway

[atheistgirl]

Originally Posted by Julia Mae

and I understood that the chemical signature of the heart muscle was the same as live tissue, not that it was "beating." (It's been a while since I watched it.) But then, I didn't think much of the presentation for the same reasons you didn't.

At the 3:40 mark in the video Gomez claims Zuigbe said the tissue was ''moving - it was beating''. Since it's a translation into English, it could be he was trying to convey the chemical signature was the same as live tissue, in other words it was a living sample, cells were moving, not that it was literally beating - but that's where the beating reference came from.

Sarah x

[Julia Mae]

Originally Posted by atheistgirl

At the 3:40 mark in the video Gomez claims Zuigbe said the tissue was ''moving - it was beating''. Since it's a translation into English, it could be he was trying to convey the chemical signature was the same as live tissue, in other words it was a living sample, cells were moving, not that it was literally beating - but that's where the beating reference came from.

Sarah x

Uh-oh. I assumed it was the same video and didn't watch this one. Oh well. Anyway, I found the whole story - well - it didn't make sense. There are Eucharistic miracles I do believe, there's one from Fatima with a photograph. I like old photo evidence because they were very had to fake in those days, convincingly.

[PaxEtBonumFides]

Originally Posted by peace2u2

And this is not the first time this miracle has happened. See links below:

An 8th century monk struggling with the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist:

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucha.../lanciano.html

Others:

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucha...r/bolsena.html

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/blanot.html

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucha...r/holland.html

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/siena.html

There are probably countless miracles attributed to The Real Presence of Jesus in the Most Holy Eucharist.

We should share how Jesus has transformed our own hearts and all for His Glory so that all people will be led to salvation.

You`re right! There are other Eucharistic Miracles. But I was looking for this one because there were two virtually blind people who had SEEN Mike Willesee`s and R. Tesoriero`s film
on Eucharistic Miracles (not just the one of Buenos Aires, but also others you mentioned) in Adelaide, Australia. (I`ve got this video on Eucharistic Miracles, and also the Plea to Humanity... In my opinion, worth seeing. )

I agree with you on that; we should share... Unfortunately, not all believe these things are possible even when/if we do... Not that it should be discouraging...



God bless you!

[Christine85]

Atheistgirl- im interested to know what you think of this Church approved Eucharistic miracle

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_Lanciano#

Lol just saw the post above mine

[PaxEtBonumFides]

Originally Posted by Christine85

Atheistgirl- im interested to know what you think of this Church approved Eucharistic miracle

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_Lanciano#

Lol just saw the post above mine