Was This The Greatest Supernatural Event Of The 20th Century?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The discussion I wanted this thread to be about was not whether it came from Heaven or Mary but that it was the greatest supernatural event of the century.

Another reason I believe Fatima is authentic is because there was a huge thorough investigation done by the Church before it was declared worthy of belief.
There are many apparitions and miracles that never get approved by the Church. Like Medjugorje for example which has been going on for 20 years and many miraclulous conversions and millions of pilgrims go there every year but the Church does not have an answer as to whether there is something supernatural taking place there

Fatima is not an isolated incident which further speaks to me of its authenticity. Similar things have happened in History. Here are some of the Church approved apparitions (not all of them) that have been investigated and defy the laws of science and modern medicine.

Scientists have examined our Lady of Guadalupe's image and say there is no scientific explanation for how a person could have put the image on the fibers nor is there a scientific explanation for why the cactus fibers of the tilma dont decompose. Could that be a fairy tale?
Not to mention the fact that the apparition of the Virgin of Guadalupe lead to the miraculous conversion of the Aztecs which is the greatest conversion story of a single group of people converting to a single Religion in a short period of time in the History of the World.

There is a medical Bureau at Lourdes that according to Don Sharkley's book "The woman shall conquer" has documented over 4,000 miraculous cures from the miraculous Spring that took place at the site of the appearance of the Blessed Virgin Mary to St. Bernadette (1858). The scientists and Doctors often have no religious persuasion and do not give the miracle the term "certified" unless they have proof from medical records that the person had an incureable malady, that the cure is complete and instantaneous, and that there can be no scientific or medical explanation for the cure. That is no Fairy Tale! Look it up

At Rue de Bac France in 1830 she warned about the coming of another bloody French Revolution, and at La salette (1846) she spoke of the coming of the Potato and wheat famines that would strike Europe as a consequence of sin.

She doesn’t appear to Catholics only. In Alexandria, Egypt, the Mother of Christ appeared to Coptics, Muslims, Jews, Protestants, and agnostics. The majority of those who saw her would have been Muslim. The apparition lasted 3 hours and thousands of people from the neighborhood, surrounding areas, and passers-by gathered to the street in front of the Church to see her in an age where cell phones and video cameras were picking up the event. Unlike most apparitions, she was not just visible to a few innocent children but to everyone in the area.

On September 8 1947 she appeared with a Bible in her hand to a Protestant named Bruno Cornacchiola who was planning on killing the Pope, and told him that she was the woman from Revelation chapter 12 and told him to enter the true sheepfold. He dedicated the rest of his life to giving his testimony and trying to convert the Seventh Day Adventists.

The point I wanted to make in this thread is that such things have happened. The point I was making is that they have huge historical significance and I know of no modern supernatural event that can equal what took place at Fatima.
Whether or not they are from God was not originally what I wanted the discussion to be about.
What is clear is that these incidents have brought many unbelievers to the worship of God and to fight against personal sins and vices.
I am one of them.
 
You havent shown me where the Bible says that God cannot work in such a way. Often in Scripture Angels have come from Heaven to talk to people.
What makes it impossible that God wouldnt use a soul in Heaven to do the same? In Luke 16 the rich man was interacting with "Father Abraham".
No where in the Bible does it say that something is false if it isnt found in Scripture. Also God works in different ways at different times.
Jesus taught things that contradicted or were not found in the Scriptures of that time. In ACTS chapter 15 the Disciples had a counsel and made a decision that totally contradicted the Scriptures of that time.
This goes to show that they were not using Scripture as their final authority in making that decision and what was once very important (like the law of circumcision) was no longer of importance.
God works in different ways at different times in History and there is nothing in Scripture that says you need to back up everything with a Scripture verse.
Jesus did not leave the first century Christians with a Bible or a printing press. The Bible came more than 300 years later and the first Bible was not printed until more than 1400 years later.
For more than 1400 years after the death of Christ it would have been impossible for even 1% of Christians to own their own Bible.

God is perfectly capable of sending a soul in Heaven to give a message to someone on earth. Much changed after the New Covenant. Not all of the changes and not all of how God worked in the early Church is contained in the New Testament.
The New Testament covers a very brief period of time and a small amount of the History of the early Church and the Apostles is contained in the NT.
One thing I see consistently in Scripture is that at different times in History God acts in ways that he didnt act previously. Many things that were important in the time of Moses were not important in the time of Abraham.
Much of what was important in the time of Moses was not important in the time of Jesus and the Apostles.

With that said, there may be ways that God works today that he didnt 500 years ago.

Also, Elizabeth filled with the Holy Spirit said to Mary "Who am I that the Mother of my Lord should visit me"?
Elizabeth was the Mother of the greatest prophet John the Baptist yet she felt unworthy to be in the presence of the Mother of her Lord (God). I think that sets Mary apart.
The Scripture says all generations will call her blessed Luke 1:48. She is also called "full of grace","blessed among women," and the angel tells her she has found favor with God.
That sets her apart from me. I know that all generations will not call me blessed, i am not full of grace, and have not found favor with God.
She was the only virgin to become pregnant and the baby she gave birth to was the Word Incarnate. How many women gave birth to God's son? That really sets her apart.
The Lord worked his first miracle at the request of his Mother at the wedding of Cana. He mentioned that his hour had not yet come yet he reluctantly worked the miracle because his Mother asked him to.
We see that Christ is obediant to the ten commandments including the commandment "honor your Father and Mother".

And the Correct interpretation of Revelation 12 states that she is the Mother of the faithful
"17 Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring—those who keep God’s commands and hold fast their testimony about Jesus."
 
First off, I believe I have given scripture showing He doesn't-however, you are the one making the claim, the burden of proof, is on you.

Im not talking about what God and Jesus are capable of doing, sure theyre capable of doing such things, the question is whether or not they DO such things. Sure, elizabeth felt humbed in the presence of Mary, and even called mary full of grace. That doesn't make Mary any less human, nor does it mean Mary should be prayed to, nor does it say that she will come back in visions and the like. In fact, the mere fact that those things ARN'T in scripture, backs up my claims. And yes, Jesus respected His mothers wishes-after all, what kind of person would He be if He didnt honor His parents-but He did not do so because she was higher up the food chain so to speak, Jesus, is still Gods only son. So, again, nothing to show she was this almighty person we should pray to-and nothing to indicate she will come again in visions. She certainly didnt show up to the apostle Paul, or Timothy, or anyone else.

As far as revelation 12, correct interpretation according to who?
 
Avemaria, you are wasting your time, he is setting up straw man arguments and changing tack when they are knocked down.
 
if your calling scripture straw, then I guess I am glo, but I dont consider scripture to be straw-I consider it to be the holy word of God. If you can't back it up with scripture, then maybe you need to question what it is you believe. Ave, has at least made an attempt to bring forward scripture-though out of context, you on the other hand, have not listed a single verse. All Im asking is you two back up your assertions with the word of God-its what I have been asking for from the beginning. To back up your assertions with scripture-which neither of you have been able to do. If you cannot do that, then I honestly beseech you to re-evaluate what it is you believe. If you can, then I will do so.
 
We are not arguing about scripture, that is where you are misrepresenting the issue.
The facts are that several children spoke with a woman who appeared in a miraculous nature, told them that she was the Virgin Mary, and that here would be a miracle following. The children did as they were told and later 70,000 plus people viewed a miracle just as it had been foretold.

What I have stated is fact, not opinion. The Bible says nothing about it, the Bible also says nothing about the vast majority of reality.

If you are expecting the Bible to be the yardstick of reality you have been misled. It has a very specific purpose, a guide for a Christian life, not a measure of any and every thing.
 
no, what you have stated is that children believe they were visited by mary and this happened. You have yet to show that mary was who she said she was-and not a demon impersonating Mary. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that people come back from the dead to visit the living, with the exception of Moses and Elijah, and they didnt visit normal humans, but visited Jesus. Its not scriptural

Fact is, you dont know that this was mary and not a demon. Children are easily deceived, and if that is all your evidence-then I suggest that you have none. Im not saying the event didnt happen, Im not even saying the kids didnt see anything, Im saying that they didnt see the actual mother mary. It was a lie. And until you can give me, where in scripture, God promises "sun" miracles "prophecied" by the mother mary, then you have nothing. I have already shown you several scriptures where were not to add to or take from the Bible, including prophecies, now its your turn.
 
The first person to have a vision of the Blessed Virgin Mary was the Apostle John and he wrote about it in the book of Revelation Chapter 12.
the child the Woman brought about cannot be anyone else than Christ, because the dragon is standing before the Woman attempting to devour him at his birth, which refers to the unsuccessful persecution through Herod (Mt 2). He shall “rule all the nations with a rod of iron” (Rev 12:5) which refers to his nationwide reign through the Church.
why then refuse to identify the “Woman clothed with the sun” with the Mother of Jesus?

The miraculous image of Guadalupe, which like the shroud of Turin baffles scientists and lacks any natural explanation, is of Mary clothed in the sun and standing on the moon.

Okay patriot if you want me to further biblically defend my belief's please send me a personal message. My intention was never to have an arguement on this thread.

I am grateful to God that he let his Mother be my Mother. I had a terrible relationship with my earthly Mother and much healing came through a relationship with my Heavenly Mother. So praise God for her influence and friendship.

She brought me to Jesus and lead me to renounce all sorts of sins and vices, turned my eyes from worldly vanities, and lead me to the realization that there is nothing in life as important as doing the will of God and I should pray and seek to serve and obey him at all times.
I thank God for such a friend, advocate, and gift.

It appears to me that God may see that some people who had previously been deaf to all pleading would renounce their sins and convert if he sent his Mother. I have read Mary's messages and done much research to find in her appearances much inspiration, insight, and an increase in Faith, Hope, and Charity.

I was in love with sin and deaf to all pleading and had a conversion reading about Marian Apparitions, the miracles, the messages. All thanks be to God for that!
It seems that she is quite an evangelist and has brought more people to Jesus Christ than any other creature to walk the planet. It would seem that God is using her as an instrument to lead people to him.

If you feel strongly that it would do you no good to acknowledge Mary as your Mother than I am not asking you to go against your conscience.

God loves you Patriot. I love you as well. Please walk humbly with God. Please serve him with an undivided heart. Seek his will at all times and pray without ceasing.

May God bless you my brother in Christ!
 
well, first off there is no mary on the moon. scientifically, that is proven. Second, I agree with you that in that vision, the women was most likely mary, but I dont think it was "mary herself" but rather, God showing him a image of mary, to show a greater point. And, while I respect you not wanting to turn this into a debate/argument, I have no interest in discussing this in PM. If one is not willing to defend his beliefs, in front of everyone, then they should not have posted such a controversial topic in the first place. Just my .02 cents.
 
It isnt a matter of me not being willing to defend the beliefs in front of everyone
believe me I want to but to do so I would have to show you where in Scripture the "Bible alone" theory is not supported and where obediance to the Church is supported.
To discuss such things would be a violation of what the administrator warned about and could quickly get the thread deleted.
So I would be happy to discuss such things with you in public format but it would result in this thread getting terminated like a previous one I started.

God bless you!
 
so its ok to break the rules in PM but not in the open? theres a reason the administrator has made it against the rules-because we answer to God-not the church. The church is not on par with God, nor is that even Biblical, a church is a body of believers, who have come together to bring Christ to the world-not present "new" prophecy, or anything of the like. So I say again, I will not continue in PM-if debating it in the open is against the rules, then so is it in PM, circumventing them that way is wrong.
 
I didnt think it was against the rules to discuss such things via personal messaging as long as both parties were okay with it nor do I see the reason why it would be
 
in any case, I dont accept the authority of the Church, it is not Biblical, and never will because its not Biblical, so a debate via PM would be a waste of effort. I accept no spiritual authority except Gods authority.
 
Start a new thread with that topic and I will enter into a debate with you.
It is totally off-topic to be discussing that on this thread. The question on this thread was "Was This The Greatest Supernatural Event Of The 20th Century?"
not a question about Church authority.
There was a reason why I didnt even mention the name Mary in the opening post because I didnt want it to be a case of defending teachings regarding her just an examination of what happened and to see if you or anyone could give me a greater example of a modern supernatural event.
 
well, you wanted an examination. I gave you my opinion, and you gave me yours. examination is, for yours to be accurate and it is from God, you have to prove that it was the virgin mary, and that it was lined up with the Bible. Not the church, with the Bible. If you cannot do so, then it wasnt the mother mary, and the event was not from God (if it was anything supernatural at all, and not some kind of natural phenomenon that the people of that time simply didnt understand) in fact, I cant find much information as to what it actually was. It coulda just been a meteorite falling to earth that covered the sun, and it was bright enough that people thought it was the sun-would explain it bouncing around.
 
I feel I have sufficiently refuted what you just said and explained even from a Biblical perspective how such a thing could be from God.
I have also explained why natural phenomenon doesnt explain some of the other things that took place besides the solar miracle.
No need to repeat myself...I got 2 go
I'll be back tommoro
peace be with you!
 
you havent though, I explained why the scripture you presented was either out of context, or not applied properly. This thread, was started by your own words-about this solar miracle, not the others. You have kids claiming they saw the virgin mary, but cannot prove it was Mary that they saw, and a dancing sun that could simply be a natural phenomenon that mankind hadnt seen before. All circumstantial. the only actual fact here, is you have a town full of people who saw something odd, and kids who say they saw something odd.
 
OK, so my take on the O/P question, before the Mod Squad locks, deletes or raptures this thread in which case it makes no difference.
I do not consider the material you posted Ave, as being the 'Greatest Supernatural Event Of The 20th Century'.
There have been countless souls saved by the Holy Spirit working through many evangelists, calling sinners to repentance at more than just a few crusades. There have been major revivals throughout the World, again by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
The function or the ministry of the Holy Spirit is to glorify Christ Jesus. That is what we Christians need to be looking for in any manifestation. Visions of Mary, miracles ascribed to that vision must point exclusively to and move people to glorify Christ Jesus. If this does not happen then there is serious grounds to view the event with the gravest of suspicion.
1Cor 12:3. Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking in the Spirit of God ever says "Jesus is accursed!" and no one can say "Jesus is Lord" except in the Holy Spirit. Colour emphasis added

You talk of 70,000 people witnessing something...what of it? 70,000 is a pitifully small sample of humankind, for the Lord to want to influence.
It is obvious that you are of Roman Catholic persuasion, and I will not criticize you for that, but I will fault you if you push that which is not true. If this thread survives the 'grim reaper' , I would like to point out a few minor errors in your argument......we shall see.
 
Well then; first of all, I believe that Jesus put the skids under all these visions and apparitions when He told the Pharisees : Matt 12:39. But he answered them, "An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah.
Mat 12:40 For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

"This generation" properly refers to the generation of men living in the end times. That is from then till now and beyond, till Christ shall return. We do seek signs. We are an evil and adulterous generation.
The Crucifixion, death, burial and glorious resurrection are the sign we have been given by the Christ.....is than not sufficient for us?

In post #23 you made a vague reference to the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Please consider what Jesus was teaching us more fully.
Luke 16:29. But Abraham said, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.'
Luke 16:30. And he said, 'No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.'
Luke 16:31. He said to him, 'If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.'"
So then, the rich guy asks for what? He asks for a dearly departed to return to the Earth to warn (in this case) his brothers.
And what does Abraham respond with? That is right! Unbelieving people will not be convinced even by the return of the dead.
Now if that was a lesson Jesus wanted to teach, we should believe it above any competitive idea don't you think?

Also, in that same post you mention the counsel of Jerusalem. Ave, the rules for circumcision were to induct male children into the covenant that the Lord made between Himself and Abraham. But as Christians were are heirs with Christ of a new covenant, one that involves circumcision of the spirit, not the flesh. The Apostles were not setting aside any scripture at all.
Again from your post #23, you say:"The New Testament covers a very brief period of time and a small amount of the History of the early Church and the Apostles is contained in the NT." This is true, however do not loose sight of the fact that "2Tim 3:16. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
2Tim 3:17. that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
Now if the Scriptures made the servants of the Lord complete and fully equipped, then it follows that the scriptures need no future embellishment.
Ahhh that post #23 again!:) The Marriage feast at Cana was not the first miracle that Jesus should be credited with.
Consider fasting forty days and nights. Jesus resisted hunger, He resisted thirst. He resisted temptation. Now that was a miracle greater than turning a bit of water into wine. Remember that Jesus fasted forty days and nights before the devil's tempting even began.
Now, in post#29, you suggest that God thought Mary might succeed where the sign of Jonah failed.
Not good.
Also I can not remain silent on this most important issue. Mary was the mother of the man Jesus. She was not the mother of God. That is absurd. Mother being the source of life for her offspring and the source of God's life, she most emphatically was not. Jesus' Father is God the Father, why? because he was begotten of the Father. Jesus as to his human nature was Mary's son. Please do not say that Mary is the mother of God. God has no progenitor. That is as ridiculous as saying that Daffy Duck hatched out of an orange.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top