It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
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)
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.
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.
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?
If you want to see a proper miracle image, look no further than the Tilma from Mexico
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."
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". This could refer to the Aztec painter Marcos Cipac de Aquino, who was active at that time. 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", 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
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.