Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Theism and Atheism

Posted Apr 30, '11 at 11:17am

vesperbot

vesperbot

986 posts

Magic Tricks: Card Forcing : Prediction in an Envelope Card Magic Trick

Aha, these are based on maths, I have read some of the tricks like this. You have a prepared stack of cards 52 tall, and have a card in your back, then you make some shufflings with the hands of an assistant, that force 39th (or 37th IIRC) card to be on top or bottom. Voila. You can't do the same with any sensible wording, as there are too many of them. And if the wording will literally get fulfilled, isn't it a propecy made true?

Remembers me of the first part of the Prophecy of the Popes, whose mottos were accurate because they had always been done afterwards.

Wow, I have heard someone said there will be 112 popes from some name, but I didn't know about this link. Yes, if that would be written afterwards, it's normal to comply with what happened, but if something was written prior to an event, and something like 1938 aurora (I still believe it's not entirely mundane, though won't force the matter) being extremely unusual, with the following Anschluss as the srart of war mentioned in the prophecy? Ain't it war, destroying an independent state? And, Sister Lucia spoke about this being the omen prior to Hitler devising plans to wreck Europe.

 

Posted Apr 30, '11 at 2:55pm

qwerty1011

qwerty1011

569 posts

Taking 25.01.1938 alone, yes indeed, taking Fatima's prediction, there's a link which God made that. Basically prophecies are to be read in conjunction with any events that are around. There are reports that the 2nd secret (which regarded 1938 aurora) was told by Laura to her confessor, and written down and sealed away to not get revealed prior to the time. Such secrets are normally kept sealed without any interference. It's like with Amsterdam 1945-1957, some info was sealed and then revealed to public.

Yes, obviously ignoring the possibility that it was made up and then released to everyone.

 

Posted Apr 30, '11 at 3:44pm

MageGrayWolf

MageGrayWolf

9,673 posts

Knight

Let's take a look at the part of the prophecy that supposedly speaks of this aurora.

"You have seen hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace. The war is going to end: but if people do not cease offending God, a worse one will break out during the Pontificate of Pius XI. When you see a night illumined by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign given you by God that he is about to punish the world for its crimes, by means of war, famine, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father."

First off this look extremely vague to me. it doesn't give any dates as to when this light is suppose to show up. Also we know what illuminated the sky that night. Now this prophecy get's sealed for nearly a decade until some event that could be interpreted to fit it happens and it get's shown to mean something? I call bull.
Another things I see here if we are to consider this prophecy as legit, it would mean God is responsible for World War II given that was the event this prophecy was related to.

I guess if we are to relate the events of this prophecy to WWII and take it with any seriousness, then I guess the Nazi's had it right with what they put on their belt buckles.
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y163/MageGrayWolf/snapshot1.png

 

Posted Apr 30, '11 at 5:01pm

qwerty1011

qwerty1011

569 posts

god was with the Nazis. And the Allies. Basically every theist in a war has god on their side. Or at least thinks they do and since God is all fantasy what people think is what God actually does.

 

Posted May 1, '11 at 3:41pm

vesperbot

vesperbot

986 posts

Yes, obviously ignoring the possibility that it was made up and then released to everyone.

And taking this as the only truth does no good to the one who does.

First off this look extremely vague to me. it doesn't give any dates as to when this light is suppose to show up. Also we know what illuminated the sky that night.

First, "During the pontificate of Pius XI" is enough of a date setting. Second, you think you know, you haven't provided the complete scientific explanation of the lighting on 25.01.1938, though this being an aurora is a good one. And I would also like to remind you of Jn 7:27 and follows, just in case.

Basically every theist in a war has god on their side. Or at least thinks they do

Indeed many think that if there will be a war, God will be on our side. And those who wage war directly think the same indeed. Unfortunately for them, God remains with those who lose their home and brethren due to that war, because they are the ones who need consolation and mercy. You said this right, but only this.

 

Posted May 1, '11 at 5:11pm

MageGrayWolf

MageGrayWolf

9,673 posts

Knight

First, "During the pontificate of Pius XI" is enough of a date setting.

Which it then fails at if WWII is the one this prophecy is suppose to be talking about. Pius died in February of 1939 and the war didn't start until September of 1939. Was this guy serving his term as Pope for about 7 months after he died?

you think you know, you haven't provided the complete scientific explanation of the lighting on 25.01.1938, though this being an aurora is a good one.

How so? We have evidence of all the conditions for an aurora on that date, despite your attempt to deny this. How is this not a valid scientific explanation? Or are you trying to weasel through some bs of "well it's not 100% proven" argument? Which ignores the fact that's not how science works.

 

Posted May 2, '11 at 2:13am

vesperbot

vesperbot

986 posts

Pius died in February of 1939 and the war didn't start until September of 1939.

Eliminating Austria as state isn't an action of peace, it was forced, read above (~4 pages upwards, I posted this).

How is this not a valid scientific explanation?

I said complete, not "valid". I accepted this as a valid explanation, but pointed out that the limits of the event are beyond what naturally happened, even in 1709. I did that just because I don't have enough information of possible ranges of aurora borealis. So an explanation is valid, but incomplete. Also you have only suggested that there was a coronal mass ejection, not confirmed its existence.

Or are you trying to weasel through some bs of "well it's not 100% proven" argument?

You do this all the time, why should I not treat you with your own medicine?

 

Posted May 2, '11 at 2:39am

DBLACKSTAR

DBLACKSTAR

222 posts

There are know knowns and there are known unkowns, but there are also unkown unkowns things we don't know we don't know.  Just cause you don't have evidence that something does exist does not mean that you have evidence that something does not exist.  The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

 

Posted May 2, '11 at 2:45am

DBLACKSTAR

DBLACKSTAR

222 posts

Sorry for spamming but that is just a quote that, I don't quite remember were I got it from, but I lost a bet recently and I must use it as frequently as possible when it involves a religious debate.

 

Posted May 2, '11 at 2:50am

MageGrayWolf

MageGrayWolf

9,673 posts

Knight

You do this all the time, why should I not treat you with your own medicine?

Let me know when your ready to actually hold a discussion.

 
Reply to Theism and Atheism

You must be logged in to post a reply!