FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-03-2002, 12:02 PM   #1
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A place in the Northern Hemisphere of Planet Earth
Posts: 1,250
Post Do the eucharistic miracles prove the eucharist is Jesus' body?

I have recently watched a video which showed of the Eucharistic miracles in Lunciano, Italy. A priest had doubts about his faith, and the Eucharist turned to flesh. When they took the blood to be tested, they found it was still very fresh blood, but it was dated to be 1300 years old. normal human blood starts to turn an ugly color and get all dried up after about 15 mins if it is not refrigerated. This blood didn't. It was still perfect but yet dated to be 1300 years old. How is this possible? This miracle happened in 700 A.D. If you wanna research it yourself, find by me.
Half-Life is offline  
Old 12-03-2002, 12:05 PM   #2
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 1,626
Smile

I believe in miracles however I have not heard of this one...
Amie is offline  
Old 12-03-2002, 12:32 PM   #3
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middletown, CT
Posts: 7,333
Talking

Gotta love those 700 A.D. dating techniques and videocameras...
Bumble Bee Tuna is offline  
Old 12-03-2002, 01:44 PM   #4
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Alaska, USA
Posts: 1,535
Post

I take it you watched a video about a Eucharistic miracle alleged to have taken place around A.D. 700. Some of the blood from that miracle has been preserved through the centuries, tested recently, and despite its fresh appearance is aged 1300 years.

Here's <a href="http://www.concernedcatholics.org/miracles.htm" target="_blank">one account</a> of the tale. <a href="http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html" target="_blank">Another here</a>. Google for "Lanciano."

The tests from 1981 confirm that it is human tissue. Perhaps I'm just cynical, but I wonder how they prevented any substitution hocus-pocus. That is, I don't see any dating technique to show 1300-year-old blood, and not a recent substitution.

Strange how this and the Shroud make out Jesus as blood type AB. Such a generous guy I'd peg as type O -- the universal donor.

[ December 03, 2002: Message edited by: Grumpy ]</p>
Grumpy is offline  
Old 12-03-2002, 02:29 PM   #5
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A place in the Northern Hemisphere of Planet Earth
Posts: 1,250
Post

The Flesh is real Flesh. The Blood is real Blood.


The Flesh and the Blood belong to the human species.


The Flesh consists of the muscular tissue of the heart.


In the Flesh we see present in section: the myocardium, the endocardium, the vagus nerve and also the left ventricle of the heart for the large thickness of the myocardium.


The Flesh is a "HEART" complete in its essential structure.


The Flesh and the Blood have the same blood-type: AB (Blood-type identical to that which Prof. Baima Bollone uncovered in the Holy Shroud of Turin).


In the Blood there were found proteins in the same normal proportions (percentage-wise) as are found in the sero-proteic make-up of the fresh normal blood.


In the Blood there were also found these minerals: chlorides, phosphorus, magnesium, potassium, sodium and calcium.


The preservation of the Flesh and of the Blood, which were left in their natural state for twelve centuries and exposed to the action of atmospheric and biological agents, remains an extraordinary phenomenon.


Do these things make it sound like the flesh is just from humans? or does this not suggest divine presence?
Half-Life is offline  
Old 12-03-2002, 02:36 PM   #6
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas
Posts: 29,689
Post

Your description suggests a large dose of gullibility to me.
Mageth is offline  
Old 12-03-2002, 02:43 PM   #7
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas
Posts: 29,689
Post

And also sugggests a bit of uncredited plagarizing as well. Most of your last post was quoted verbatim from <a href="http://www.cmns.mnegri.it/miracolo/shortdesc.html" target="_blank">this site</a> or another site containing the same material.

[ December 03, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</p>
Mageth is offline  
Old 12-03-2002, 02:43 PM   #8
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Two Steps Ahead
Posts: 1,124
Post

Eh, please. Let me get this straight. In 700 AD, a priest found his Eucharist had turned to flesh of some sort, along with blood. This flesh was tested in 1981, and was found to be fresh?

That's absurd, and it's relatively obvious what happened. El switcheroo.
Zadok001 is offline  
Old 12-03-2002, 02:45 PM   #9
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas
Posts: 29,689
Post

If you do a little research, you'll find that the flesh is not "fresh" by any stretch of the imagination. (Go to the link I posted, for example).

[ December 03, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</p>
Mageth is offline  
Old 12-03-2002, 03:42 PM   #10
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Scotland, UK
Posts: 602
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Half-Life:
<strong>The Flesh is real Flesh. The Blood is real Blood.


The Flesh and the Blood belong to the human species.

[Fiach] What is the evidence of that? Did they do a DNA profile? If it is still "fresh" why doesn't it clot and degrade like real blood?


The Flesh consists of the muscular tissue of the heart.

[Fiach] Unless this tissue is perfused by pumping action of oxygen carrying blood, it dies in a matter of minutes. If it appears to be unchanged, then it probably is not living tissue but some kind of gel or other material not biodegradable.


In the Flesh we see present in section: the myocardium, the endocardium, the vagus nerve and also the left ventricle of the heart for the large thickness of the myocardium.

[Fiach] It doesn't make sense for it to stay live without blood perfusion by pump action and the equivalent of lungs to oxygenate that blood. It simply doesn't make sense.


The Flesh is a "HEART" complete in its essential structure.

[Fiach] Sorry, I don't believe it. I would have to have the independent examination by a team of secular pathologists and pathophysiologists.


The Flesh and the Blood have the same blood-type: AB (Blood-type identical to that which Prof. Baima Bollone uncovered in the Holy Shroud of Turin).

[Fiach] The last I read, the Shroud of Turin was proved a fraud. There wasn't blood on it. If this other claim is of real blood, let them send it to some eminent hematologists to study its composition and DNA profile. A blood sample from a bleeding Christ's statue in Mexico, was found to be "female" blood with two X chromosomes.


In the Blood there were found proteins in the same normal proportions (percentage-wise) as are found in the sero-proteic make-up of the fresh normal blood.

[Fiach] Wrong. If so, then the fibrinogen and other proteins would naturally clot. Enzymes (also proteins) would then break it down into something that looks like crankcase oil.


In the Blood there were also found these minerals: chlorides, phosphorus, magnesium, potassium, sodium and calcium.

[Fiach] Also found in sea water to a similar concentration and in tap water in weaker concentrations.


The preservation of the Flesh and of the Blood, which were left in their natural state for twelve centuries and exposed to the action of atmospheric and biological agents, remains an extraordinary phenomenon.

[Fiach] Right. It should not happen. It requires that one postulate magic. Magic remains yet to be proven. No independent reputable scientist has verified your claim. As a molecular geneticist, I would have likely heard of such evidence. I would be happy to examine it in my lab in Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.


Do these things make it sound like the flesh is just from humans? or does this not suggest divine presence?</strong>
[Fiach] It represents an extraodinary claim that is unsupported by any independent examiners. We don't know if the claim is true or not. To speculate if it is the work of a hypothetical god is premature as long as the claim is suspicious.

Fiach
Fiach is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:53 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.