Santa Claus and God--Likely Bed Fellows
- Thread starter TheNatMan
- Start date
God has Saints/Prophets, Santa Claus has elves ....hmmmm.
Santa Claus is real. He is alive and well in the hearts and minds of all who choose to believe in his good. And no one ever martyred themselves for him, ah.., then again my xmas credit card bill kinda' martyred me.
P.S. I hate those signs that say ‘put the Christ back in Christmas” The druids started the whole winters’ solstice thing, not christ.
Couldnt agree more,trouble is much as youve either been told this or that dont/does exist,once the imaginary being is created you cant disprove it/prove it.
Its imaginary same as god and anything else,i too consider that anything that is imaginary till proven existent is the rule,not existent till proven imaginary because we can already clearly see what imaginary is.
Last edited:
Personally it doesn't really matter to me. It's a great picture none the less. I can't get my hands on the original infared reports online but I found some quotes that sugest the citation given by the atheist site is wrong. Juan Diego was canonized in 2002 after the infared reports and so there could not be a clear sign of forgery. Either way a non-biased site should at least present the quotes of a research paper against it being a forgery. http://www.alienjigsaw.com/yk2/guadalup.html
This is the quote from the atheist site.
"The image itself also yields evidence of considerable borrowing. It is a traditional portrait of Mary, replete with standard artistic motifs and in fact clearly derived from earlier Spanish paintings. Yet some proponents of the image have suggested that the obvious artistic elements were later additions and that the "original" portions-the face, hands, robe, and mantle-are therefore "inexplicable" and even "miraculous" (Callahan 1981)."
Compared with
"What is even more astonishing is the fact that the image was not protected by a pane of glass during the first several centuries. It was preserved in a small, open but moist chapel and incessantly exposed to incense and the smoke of countless candle lights. Invalids have placed the tilma on their bodies, millions have touched it, and hundreds of thousands have kissed it. Pieces of jewelry and private belongings have been placed on it, as well as swords and sabers. A bio-physicist named Phillip Callahan from the University of Florida, measured the energy mass of the ultraviolet light of the candle lights in close proximity of the tilma in 1973. According to his investigation, the light emissions over the last 450 years should have destroyed the colors a long time ago. "Too intensive ultraviolet light blanches all the color pigments, whether they are organic or inorganic by nature. Blue will fade especially fast." (Callahan, 1981). Somehow, all the colors have survived to this day."
"In 1964, an analysis of the image itself was made by two photo experts from Kodak (Callahan, 1981). They determined that the image "definitely has the character of a photograph." An infrared examination by Philipp Callahan and Jody Smith in May 1979, showed the absence of a prepared canvas, as well as a ground-coat or a protective coat of varnish. "The infrared photographs do not show any brush marks, and the absence of any glue is obvious because of the many unfilled gaps which are visible in the material. Such a phenomenon is fantastic...It was found that the pink color on the image is able to let infrared light pass through. This is another mystery. Most pink pigments are normally impervious to infrared light, but this is not the case for those pigments on the image." (Callahan, 1981)."
I've never heard of Glenn Taylor and certainly cannot find a citation here. The eyes appear to be studied by many artist though.
"In 1929, the Mexican photographer Alfonso Gonzales discovered that the eyes of the figure on the tilma were obviously reflecting a human face. He announced his discovery, but it was kept secret by the church and eventually was simply forgotten.
More than 30 years later on the 29th of May 1951, the illustrator Carlos Salinas examined an enlargement of the Madonna's face (on the tilma). Using a magnifying glass, he discovered that the pupil of the right eye contained the image of a bearded man. Consequently, the arch bishop of Mexico City established a committee of inquiry. On the 11th of December 1955, the members of this committee not only confirmed the discovery, but were also able to state that in all probability the face was that of Juan Diego.
Further examinations by oculists, opticians, and physicists showed further details. For example, the oculist Rafael Chavoignet stated (quoted in Johnston, 1981): "With the most possible carefulness I studied the eyes and, indeed, I observed the image of a man in the cornea of both eyes. The distortion on the position of the image is identical to what would be produced in a normal eye."
I cannot find any source for this which is very odd. In complete honesty, I think that this site is forging it. I searched for two of these quotes and I came up with only two or so atheist sites.
http://www.google.com/search?q="pai...tnG=Google+Search&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
http://www.google.com/search?q="The...tnG=Google+Search&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
From this timeline it looks like they got the dates wrong of the formal investigation. http://www.sancta.org/table.html It's typical that a bishop will be hestiant towards miracles.
Though fromi here it looks like there was canonical inquiry in 1556 by Montufar.
http://www.ewtn.com/library/MARY/CEGUADAL.HTM
I don't think so. It's hard to put a hoax together where you have the photograph evidence and the people who have seen her. The photograph clearly shows a woman and a dove.
R
Redoubtable
Guest
Do you know anything about slavery in the South? Anything at all?
Well, regardless of whatever you think you know, it very rarely even approached the stark inhumanity and depravity portrayed by the illusory propaganda of Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin.
Well I wrote something just for one these occasions. There are a few minor mistakes but oh well.
The game of hockey consists of two teams of players, two nets and one puck. The blades of the players make deep gorges in the ice, while the helpless puck is passed to and fro between them. Finally the puck finds the net. The game of slavery is much more dangerous. Each slave holder passed each slave off like chattel among themselves, leaving gapping wounds in the flesh of the slave. Douglass found himself trapped in the net of slavery without freewill. He was no longer a human, but like an animal. Just as hockey is played on a cold surface, the blades of slavery needed the cold cruel hearts of men. Douglass’ found himself with moderates that disagreed with the inhuman treatment of slaves, but thought that slavery could still exist in a modified form. Thus Douglass went to great lengths to prove this is untrue, that even in Maryland, the place where slavery was fairest, slavery was still inhuman.
Knowledge about the world, about what it was like to be free, was kept from the slave. Douglass was to know even not the day of his birth, less he think it was special. He was kept like an animal, not knowing the name of his father. The slave holders made it clear to Douglass that his own birth was an embarrassment, a date not worthy of recollection. The only purpose of Douglass’ life was to work the fields and serve his master. His own mother was kept away from him as much as possible. It would not be polite for a slave to develop family relations. This was a benefit that only the free could partake in as slaves would eventually have their family ties broken. “Better to break them early than old”, said the cold heart made of stone. Even the animals and birds are not kept from their family.
We must read -- to be love, write -- to send love, see -- to be in love, and hear love echo in a bottle. This message of freedom, of love itself, is kept safe in a bottle. It perpetually resounds in our hearts. No waves can break this bottle, that which gives us freedom. The slave holder knew that when a slave knew how to read, he might read what freedom was like and make means to escape. Douglass tirelessly learned how to read, how to write, and now we see and hear his freedom. The slave holders were so inhuman that they did not even want their slaves to dream about freedom. Even prisoners know what freedom is like. Even they have hopes of being free.
If the participants in slavery did not have a cold heart before slavery, their hearts would certainly be cold after. None can stay in this freezer without being cold. Douglass was the first slave of Mrs. Auld. The face of this woman, untouched and unblemished by slavery, glowed brightly with kindness. Every slave of hers was beside themselves; not knowing how to act to her kindness and warmness. How quick the warmth of kindness changes to the coldness of hate? She soon found that by teaching the slaves how to read, she was teaching them how to be free. Slavery demanded this most cruel treatment from the slave holders. If they did not, the slaves might become civilized and demand their freedom.
On the other hand, slavery also changed the mind and soul of a slave. The slave holders of Douglass gave slaves holidays. On each holiday, the slaves would drink and have boxing matches. To do else wise, was to treat the master’s kindness with contempt. This kindness was not real kindness, but the kindness only to stop rebellion. The master’s plan was to show the negative aspects of freewill. To bring the slave down to the rank of an animal, not fit for anything else but an animal. There were other ways to do this as well. Certain slave holders, such as Mr. Covey, were known to be “nigger-breakers”. Most slave holders would beat their slaves into submission, but some were particularly mean. Mr. Covey not only beat his slaves, but loved to beat his slaves. So random were his beatings that some slaves even used magical roots to avoid being beaten. Surprisingly the root worked for Douglass. He concluded that if a slave does not fight back he will be beat into a submissive animal. The inhuman treatment of slaves forced the slaves to rebel, to act like an animal when attacked.
It is the most inhuman crime to not pay the workers their fair wages. Worst in Colonel Lloyd’s garden, slaves would work and not be able to eat the fruits of their labor. Even Adam and Eve did not find punishment this bad. They at least were banished from the garden to toil the fields. Later in Douglass’ career he worked for contractors. The only difference between him and a free man was that he handed over his earnings to his master. This was the last thread to be broken for him to find freedom.
Douglass was one of the few slaves who found freedom from the inhuman institution of slavery. He was able to testify that it was inhuman. Others were not so fortunate. They were left in ensnarled in the net of slavery. Worst, their manhood was beaten into nonexistence. When the net was finally uplifted, they found themselves with no helmet, no skates, and no stick. A life only fit for a slave.
The game of hockey consists of two teams of players, two nets and one puck. The blades of the players make deep gorges in the ice, while the helpless puck is passed to and fro between them. Finally the puck finds the net. The game of slavery is much more dangerous. Each slave holder passed each slave off like chattel among themselves, leaving gapping wounds in the flesh of the slave. Douglass found himself trapped in the net of slavery without freewill. He was no longer a human, but like an animal. Just as hockey is played on a cold surface, the blades of slavery needed the cold cruel hearts of men. Douglass’ found himself with moderates that disagreed with the inhuman treatment of slaves, but thought that slavery could still exist in a modified form. Thus Douglass went to great lengths to prove this is untrue, that even in Maryland, the place where slavery was fairest, slavery was still inhuman.
Knowledge about the world, about what it was like to be free, was kept from the slave. Douglass was to know even not the day of his birth, less he think it was special. He was kept like an animal, not knowing the name of his father. The slave holders made it clear to Douglass that his own birth was an embarrassment, a date not worthy of recollection. The only purpose of Douglass’ life was to work the fields and serve his master. His own mother was kept away from him as much as possible. It would not be polite for a slave to develop family relations. This was a benefit that only the free could partake in as slaves would eventually have their family ties broken. “Better to break them early than old”, said the cold heart made of stone. Even the animals and birds are not kept from their family.
We must read -- to be love, write -- to send love, see -- to be in love, and hear love echo in a bottle. This message of freedom, of love itself, is kept safe in a bottle. It perpetually resounds in our hearts. No waves can break this bottle, that which gives us freedom. The slave holder knew that when a slave knew how to read, he might read what freedom was like and make means to escape. Douglass tirelessly learned how to read, how to write, and now we see and hear his freedom. The slave holders were so inhuman that they did not even want their slaves to dream about freedom. Even prisoners know what freedom is like. Even they have hopes of being free.
If the participants in slavery did not have a cold heart before slavery, their hearts would certainly be cold after. None can stay in this freezer without being cold. Douglass was the first slave of Mrs. Auld. The face of this woman, untouched and unblemished by slavery, glowed brightly with kindness. Every slave of hers was beside themselves; not knowing how to act to her kindness and warmness. How quick the warmth of kindness changes to the coldness of hate? She soon found that by teaching the slaves how to read, she was teaching them how to be free. Slavery demanded this most cruel treatment from the slave holders. If they did not, the slaves might become civilized and demand their freedom.
On the other hand, slavery also changed the mind and soul of a slave. The slave holders of Douglass gave slaves holidays. On each holiday, the slaves would drink and have boxing matches. To do else wise, was to treat the master’s kindness with contempt. This kindness was not real kindness, but the kindness only to stop rebellion. The master’s plan was to show the negative aspects of freewill. To bring the slave down to the rank of an animal, not fit for anything else but an animal. There were other ways to do this as well. Certain slave holders, such as Mr. Covey, were known to be “nigger-breakers”. Most slave holders would beat their slaves into submission, but some were particularly mean. Mr. Covey not only beat his slaves, but loved to beat his slaves. So random were his beatings that some slaves even used magical roots to avoid being beaten. Surprisingly the root worked for Douglass. He concluded that if a slave does not fight back he will be beat into a submissive animal. The inhuman treatment of slaves forced the slaves to rebel, to act like an animal when attacked.
It is the most inhuman crime to not pay the workers their fair wages. Worst in Colonel Lloyd’s garden, slaves would work and not be able to eat the fruits of their labor. Even Adam and Eve did not find punishment this bad. They at least were banished from the garden to toil the fields. Later in Douglass’ career he worked for contractors. The only difference between him and a free man was that he handed over his earnings to his master. This was the last thread to be broken for him to find freedom.
Douglass was one of the few slaves who found freedom from the inhuman institution of slavery. He was able to testify that it was inhuman. Others were not so fortunate. They were left in ensnarled in the net of slavery. Worst, their manhood was beaten into nonexistence. When the net was finally uplifted, they found themselves with no helmet, no skates, and no stick. A life only fit for a slave.
"More than 30 years later on the 29th of May 1951, the illustrator Carlos Salinas examined an enlargement of the Madonna's face (on the tilma). Using a magnifying glass, he discovered that the pupil of the right eye contained the image of a bearded man.
SANTA CLAUS! I WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG!
SANTA CLAUS! I WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG!
"As to the apparition of Mary; thousands of people saw lights of unknown origin and took them to be visions of Mary despite the lack of any detail that would suggest such identification. The accounts sound very much like those of UFO sightings in the US. As is typical with such things people tend interpret unidentified phenomenon according to cultural prejudice and other psychological influences. As the sightings took place over a Church named after Mary this influence is easily inferred; if the same ‘apparition’ were to take place over an English wheat field they would probably be claimed as alien spacecraft. The people saw something… just what it was is quite open to speculation.
Here’s an interesting article on Epidemic Hysteria as well. Suggestion is a very powerful thing.
http://www.sma.org/smj1999/augsmj99/bartholomew.pdf"
Skeptics of this phenomenon such as Joe Nickell have a tendency to ignore inconvenient facts - this "miracle" occurred exactly at the day and time it was predicted to occur - albeit Portugal was on war time at the time, and the miracle occurred at the predicted time, but according to peacetime, since Mary does not acknowledge war time. How do you explain that? Also, theories of mass hypnosis or mass hysteria were discarded, since the phenomenon was also seen by people several miles away who were not present in the crowd.
As far as the tilma, some of the comments made are rather silly - what woman does not part her hair off center? Every woman knows it is much prettier to have an off center part. Why would an artist of that era paint a painting with a seam running right through the center of his painting?
Here’s an interesting article on Epidemic Hysteria as well. Suggestion is a very powerful thing.
http://www.sma.org/smj1999/augsmj99/bartholomew.pdf"
Skeptics of this phenomenon such as Joe Nickell have a tendency to ignore inconvenient facts - this "miracle" occurred exactly at the day and time it was predicted to occur - albeit Portugal was on war time at the time, and the miracle occurred at the predicted time, but according to peacetime, since Mary does not acknowledge war time. How do you explain that? Also, theories of mass hypnosis or mass hysteria were discarded, since the phenomenon was also seen by people several miles away who were not present in the crowd.
As far as the tilma, some of the comments made are rather silly - what woman does not part her hair off center? Every woman knows it is much prettier to have an off center part. Why would an artist of that era paint a painting with a seam running right through the center of his painting?
The evidence for this is what, exactly?
For a "monotheistic" cult, Christianity sure has a lot of gods.
There are bonafide lines of montheism even in Hinduism - numbers of demigods only causes problems for a monotheist when they can't determine who or what is the cause of all causes and that status quo of the rest of the assembly