Catholic priests exorcise the entire country of Mexico to drive out demons.

a reply to: markosity1973
Church employing atheists to verify miracles? You sure about that?.miracles are not verified in this way. Like most miracles designed to lead to sainthood, they are manipulated and poorly documented. Mother Theresa was a fraud and denounced her belief in God, but her symbol was too powerful for the church to lose, so she was forced to maintain it, eventually enjoying the profiteering and lifestyle from it. When you check out the miracles done by popes and mother theresa, always in secluded camera deprived areas (convient), they are the most outlandish claims that not even the most dedicated christian could believe.

Did it work?

I could suggest a few more places for mass exorcism.

a reply to: rossacus


Christopher Hitchens testified that the halo seen in photographs of Mother Teresa was due to untested film in the photographer's cameras. The photos are what got the whole rumor of holiness going in the first place.

a reply to: rossacus

This may come as a surprise to you, but the news of Mother Theresa's faith crisis is not anything new or unheard of. I knew all about well before she died. In fact she is said to have begged to be let alone and die in her last days.

As I said she was a mundane miracle. Her life was nothing supernatural, rather her 'miracle' was the untiring work and yes the brave, if perhaps lying, face she put on in the face of adversity. How many mothers put on a fake smile to keep the family happy for instance?

Whether she was forced by higher powers to stay in her role or not is moot, but it does not take away one bit from the good works she did in her life. Trying to sully the good that she did by dragging her dirt into the open is quite tasteless really. Let the good she did speak for itself and leave the flawed and tormented human aspect out of it -none of us are perfect nor are we free from some form of self doubt.

Furthermore trying to push an Atheist agenda does not have much to do with the OP, which is actually about the exorcism of an entire nation.

a reply to: pthena

Paganism is the belief in a minimum of two-fold power, which creates the ideology of a cosmic power struggle, between good and evil.

God is not in a struggle, and thier is no evil power, except the freewill to do evil and the freewill to believe in whatever you want.

We have the freewill to believe in demon possession. And insanity may cause us to act it out.

I say demons have no power, they are only lies within your mind.

The chuch says demons can possess and control you.

A kingdom divided against itself cannot stand.

a reply to: pthena
I've watched nearly all his debates/shows and his hatred for mother Teresa runs deep. Without people like him, we would gladly accept here as an angel, until you follow the money trail and see she is merely a personification of the churches greed.

Glad someone else has seen these exposures of her.

a reply to: markosity1973
Believe it or not I knew too. Shock. Just didn't realise how deep it was, how the hospitals she worked in did nothing other than provide temporary shelter for those denied medical care from their government, spreading disease by actively not sterilising syringes, etc etc

Not one sentence suggests I am atheist, you know this from other threads. And I am not pushing an agenda so please behave.. I was highlighting that these exorcisms/miracles are just mechanisms to reinforce the belief in the church and it's bestowed divinity.

a reply to: Isurrender73

Paganism is the belief in a minimum of two-fold power, which creates the ideology of a cosmic power struggle, between good and evil.

God is not in a struggle, and thier is no evil power, except the freewill to do evil and the freewill to believe in whatever you want.

Superstition is the belief in supernatural causality—that one event causes another without any natural process linking the two events—such as astrology, religion, omens, witchcraft, prophecies, etc., that contradicts natural science.
. . .
The word superstition is sometimes used to refer to religious practices (e.g., Voodoo) other than the one prevailing in a given society (e.g., Christianity in western culture), although the prevailing religion may contain just as many superstitious beliefs. It is also commonly applied to beliefs and practices surrounding luck, prophecy and spiritual beings, particularly the belief that future events can be foretold by specific (apparently) unrelated prior events.
. . .
The current Catechism of the Catholic Church considers superstition to be sinful in the sense that it denotes a lack of trust in the divine providence of God and, as such, is a violation of the first of the Ten Commandments, defining superstition as "a perverse excess of religion" (para. #2110). The Catechism attempts to dispel commonly held preconceptions or misunderstandings about Catholic doctrine relating to superstitious practices:

Superstition is a deviation of religious feeling and of the practices this feeling imposes. It can even affect the worship we offer the true God, e.g., when one attributes an importance in some way magical to certain practices otherwise lawful or necessary. To attribute the efficacy of prayers or of sacramental signs to their mere external performance, apart from the interior dispositions that they demand is to fall into superstition. Cf. Matthew 23:16–22 (para. #2111)

So having quoted all that, here's a story:

I was working the nightshift in a facility with two coworkers. We all heard a banging (louder than knocking) on an interior wall. It went on for about 10 minutes. I assumed it was some sort of poltergeist event. The other two just looked scared. Then the handle of the locked door to the outside started rattling. The other two seemed extremely frightened at that point. I stood by the door and waited for the rattling to start again. When it did, I yanked the door open. No one there.

My coworkers were extremely angry with me because they evidently thought that a disgruntled ex-employee was outside with an AK-47 intending to kill some one.

So who was sane and who was insane? Was I insane for thinking of a poltergeist or were the other two insane for thinking of a gun toting disgruntled ex-employee? Is it possible that their pre-existing fear of impending doom caused the unexplained phenomena? If so, then was I sucked into their delusion without even knowing ahead of time what their delusion was?

a reply to: rossacus

Without people like him, we would gladly accept here as an angel, until you follow the money trail and see she is merely a personification of the churches greed.

Not just greed. That sort of pales next to her tacit endorsement of brutal dictators and disregard for victims of those dictator's death squads. I think she actually walked around the killing-fields of Guatemala and didn't seem to think there was anything amiss about it.

ETA

Correction:

It wasn't a halo as I wrote in previous post. It was the film crew was used to ASA100 film. They didn't have enough lighting for that speed film. They used brand-new ASA400(?) film which didn't require as much light. When the results turned out OK, some goonball called it a miracle "of the light of Mother Teresa" and started calling newspapers and magazines, thus a saint in the making was born.

a reply to: pthena
Precisely. Don't say those sort of things on this thread as you are diminishing all the apparent good she has done.lol

Without people like hitches exposing these sort of things we would be blind and oblivious

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: rossacus

It wasn't a halo as I wrote in previous post. It was the film crew was used to ASA100 film. They didn't have enough lighting for that speed film. They used brand-new ASA400(?) film which didn't require as much light. When the results turned out OK, some goonball called it a miracle "of the light of Mother Teresa" and started calling newspapers and magazines, thus a saint in the making was born.

'Miraculaous' photographs and film are a terrible place to start with miracles. If something was not visible to the naked eye, how is a roll of film or an electronic sensor designed to see what we see and play it back to us going to pick up anything else. It is also far, far too easy to manipulate photographs / film. You'll get no argument from me on that one. I would never consider a shady photo of Mother Theresa as being evidence of holiness.

That being said, pictures and film of events that people are seeing like Zeitoun are in another realm.

If you want to see a proper miracle image, look no further than the Tilma from Mexico

a reply to: rossacus

can I ask what you think about Teresa Neumann from Bavaria.

everybody is adding very interesting point of view

a reply to: Isurrender73

i really like that

A kingdom divided against itself cannot stand.

a reply to: markosity1973

that's a beautiful and truthful thing to say ( I think at this point about her that too)

As I said she was a mundane miracle. Her life was nothing supernatural, rather her 'miracle' was the untiring work and yes the brave, if perhaps lying, face she put on in the face of adversity. How many mothers put on a fake smile to keep the family happy for instance?

a reply to: rossacus

I've watched nearly all his debates/shows and his hatred for mother Teresa runs deep. Without people like him, we would gladly accept here as an angel, until you follow the money trail and see she is merely a personification of the churches greed.

Glad someone else has seen these exposures of her.


wow ok. what money trail?

our priest in eastern Europe came from African tribe and became our priest. imagined something like an Jamaican priest with that accent. first time I have seen chocolate person the village loved him. they bought him a car. he made repairs on church

(like I said bare in mind I believe in god but also in evolution)

it seems high catholic priests and people in power colonizing the world. what they used to be I do understand the religion is rules for sociaty and economy. from hunter to settlements.

but all self aware spieces chimps and elephants naturally do religious rituals. they are self aware and intuitively believe in something higher and they praise the gift of life. unlike us people.

so I am trying to understand where is everybody at with their believes.

like urself u confuse me a little but I like ur responses

so what has she done so horrible. I really don't know


Gandhi is the next big one (perhaps similar story, some people hate him..still need to read it to truly understand)

www.theguardian.com...

Or Fidel Castro some say he was an "anarchist" and will for ever be viewed as one. I am still undecided.

But a nun being accused of something that is something new I hear so I want to know what it is she did bad (I think u are saying she was bad. sorry if I misread it)

a reply to: pthena

So who was sane and who was insane? Was I insane for thinking of a poltergeist or were the other two insane for thinking of a gun toting disgruntled ex-employee? Is it possible that their pre-existing fear of impending doom caused the unexplained phenomena? If so, then was I sucked into their delusion without even knowing ahead of time what their delusion was?

with this story. I completely get ur point. but when I think about it. the bang was first. then the thought entered all of ur minds . that though then perhaps translated as phenomena.

like for instance with my "haunted hause"

I called it a portal lol. equally both horrible things happened but similtaniously I grew closer to understanding what I know as let's call them angels and what I perceive as god.


I also know my level of anxiety caused phenomena. believe me or not I could turn radio on just by concentrating at it for two hours. the "bad thing" was fine when left alone!! when I stoped being angry and scared, if I left it a room it was much better.

I knew when it wanted the house I had to get out. I know it got pissed of when I locked it out accidentally . It locked me out for entire night on several occasions.

I know it prayed on me. the more stressed and angry the more powerful it became. but it caused me hallucinating I know when it was me doing it (like I heared music through the house, when I came to the stereo I just thought of the wires and it power on with playing that tune)

since I left I no longer have any of it. I still can tune into and change radio frequency but that is it. what makes me sad is the beautiful aspect. virtually the euphoric experience from the positive in that house is unforgettable.

I said this twice. I stoped breathing twice and I really don't remember how but I overdosed (there is one other story). both times I knew I am alone in this boat. no Jesus or angels or god was there to help me. i was terrified and the sorrow that I am loosing my life was beyond me. I didn't want to let go of this life but I had no choice. as soon as I came to acceptance and I said to "god" I have faith in his decision to take me away I am ok with it. the calmness lasted for ever. I dozed of into nothingness I was nothing

the next thing that happened.. yeah something undiscribable and no one would believe me. so I don't say it and treasure it.

a reply to: pthena

I believe some things that defy explanation are in the mind. And some things simply can't be explained.

I have never experienced anything myself so I don't personally have a reason to believe in ghosts.

But I am not opposed to those who do. But possession would violate our freewill, And I believe the scriptures on this, we never loose our freewill.

God may blind our eyes and ears for our arrogance, but we always have freewill to return to him.

Ghosts maybe? Possession absolutely not.

a reply to: Isurrender73

you do remind me of "Neo". lol . there is a strong vibe coming from what u write ( very much in harmony but with a hint of strong and steady) don't mind me

a reply to: markosity1973

If you want to see a proper miracle image, look no further than the Tilma from Mexico

One of the problems with miracles is that we don't understand all the implications that they represent; such as, what, if any, understandings are affirmed or contradicted.

The main promoter of the cult was the Dominican Alonso de Montúfar, who succeeded the Franciscan Juan de Zumárraga as archbishop of Mexico. In a 1556 sermon Montúfar commended popular devotion to "Our Lady of Guadalupe," referring to a painting on cloth (a tilma) in the chapel of the Virgin Mary at Tepeyac, where certain miracles had occurred. Days later, Fray Francisco de Bustamante, local head of the Franciscan order, delivered a sermon denouncing the cult. He expressed concern that the Archbishop was promoting a superstitious regard for an image:

"The devotion at the chapel . . to which they have given the name Guadalupe was prejudicial to the Indians because they believed that the image itself worked miracles, contrary to what the missionary friars had been teaching them, and because many were disappointed when it did not."[15]

The next day Archbishop Montúfar opened an inquiry into the matter. At the inquiry, the Franciscans repeated their position that the image encouraged idolatry and superstition, and four witnesses testified to Bustamante's claim that the image was painted by an Indian, with one witness naming him "the Indian painter Marcos".[16] This could refer to the Aztec painter Marcos Cipac de Aquino, who was active at that time.[17][18] But "if he did, he did so without making a preliminary sketch - in itself a near-miraculous procedure.[...] Cipac may well have had a hand in painting the Image, but only in painting the additions, such as the angel and moon at the Virgin's feet",[19] claims Prof. Jody Brant Smith (referring to Philip Serna Callahan's examination of the tilma using infrared photography in 1979).
. . .
In the 16th century and probably continuing into the early 17th century, the image was modified by adding the mandorla-shaped sunburst around the Virgin, the stars on her cloak, the moon under her feet, and the angel with folded cloth supporting her - as was determined by an infrared and ocular study of the tilma in 1979.
Our Lady of Guadalupe

If nothing else, this shows that people tend to feel they have some liberty to manipulate the facts. The study of 1979 shows that the mandorla (almond shaped halo effect), the stars on cloak, the moon, and angel were added later to the miracle image. Was that to bring it in line with the then current Christian artistic depictions?

a reply to: Layaly

I called it a portal lol. equally both horrible things happened but similtaniously I grew closer to understanding what I know as let's call them angels and what I perceive as god.
. . .
since I left I no longer have any of it. I still can tune into and change radio frequency but that is it. what makes me sad is the beautiful aspect. virtually the euphoric experience from the positive in that house is unforgettable.

Some people who valued owning the house as property would have called an exorcist, so as to have the house to themselves. It does seem that you balanced the negative with the positive.