Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: AnthonyPadua on February 08, 2024, 08:45:16 AM
-
Unfortunately despite the recent videos in which the dimonds were more charitable it seems they have doubled down on their magicians video (or at least the social media handler).
https://twitter.com/DeoVolente019/status/1755574918404620602
https://twitter.com/TRUTHACRUSADA/status/1755503050800730341
Also from the guy in the first link, he said elsewhere that he is part of a new sedevacantist group. Website is below, I haven't read through all of it but I have this seen site before but the design and name has changed and much more articles have been added. It seems they are against invincible ignorance, baptism of blood and desire. This is nice, at least for me, as I have not seen any other groups than the Dimonds to be against these 3 things.
https://cognitioecclesiae.weebly.com/
-
I went to that website, and instantly my screen was covered with a gigantic image of the masonic all-seeing eye in the pyramid, like on the back of the $1 bill.
That appears to be their logo.
The whole site gives me the creeps. Who are these people?
-
Also from the guy in the first link, he said elsewhere that he is part of a new sedevacantist group. Website is below, I haven't read through all of it but I have this seen site before but the design and name has changed and much more articles have been added. It seems they are against invincible ignorance, baptism of blood and desire. This is nice, at least for me, as I have not seen any other groups than the Dimonds to be against these 3 things.
https://cognitioecclesiae.weebly.com/
I hope I'm misunderstanding you, and I really, honestly HATE TO SAY this, but...
You don't believe in invincible ignorance, Baptism of Blood, or Baptism of Desire? Seriously? BoB and BoD are literally taught in the Catechism of the Council of Trent.
I know, "Feeneyism", which many hold to.
BUT I thought that denial of BoB, BoD was a strawman distortion of what Fr. Feeney taught. One of the things I've learned on CI over the years...
And you seem to be a few notches more favorable towards the Dimonds than you should be. And a bit too excited about this "All Seeing Eye" creepy group. Is it because of the aforementioned "novel" beliefs about BoB and BoD? You seem forced by your odd belief(s) to make common cause with some really shady groups. I'm going by your own words -- you seem desperate for some group(s) that agree with your "position". So you'll take what you can get.
Here's my opinion on the Dimonds --
In a better world, the Dimonds would be arrested by the State and/or the Church and all their "apostolate" websites/materials taken offline. They would be tried for heresy.
The only good the Dimonds have to offer (like the lemonade in a 98% lemonade 2% cyanide cocktail) is their stuff on non-controversial subjects, like Evolution or Creation. We probably also agree on Abortion, sex education, and the general depravity of the Modern World. MAYBE a bit on what happened at Vatican II. But even that is a bit hazy.
-
I hope I'm misunderstanding you, and I really, honestly HATE TO SAY this, but...
You don't believe in invincible ignorance, Baptism of Blood, or Baptism of Desire? Seriously? BoB and BoD are literally taught in the Catechism of the Council of Trent.
I know, "Feeneyism", which many hold to.
BUT I thought that denial of BoB, BoD was a strawman distortion of what Fr. Feeney taught. One of the things I've learned on CI over the years...
And you seem to be a few notches more favorable towards the Dimonds than you should be. And a bit too excited about this "All Seeing Eye" creepy group. Is it because of the aforementioned "novel" beliefs about BoB and BoD? You seem forced by your odd belief(s) to make common cause with some really shady groups. I'm going by your own words -- you seem desperate for some group(s) that agree with your "position". So you'll take what you can get.
Here's my opinion on the Dimonds --
In a better world, the Dimonds would be arrested by the State and/or the Church and all their "apostolate" websites/materials taken offline. They would be tried for heresy.
The only good the Dimonds have to offer (like the lemonade in a 98% lemonade 2% cyanide cocktail) is their stuff on non-controversial subjects, like Evolution or Creation. We probably also agree on Abortion, sex education, and the general depravity of the Modern World. MAYBE a bit on what happened at Vatican II. But even that is a bit hazy.
I'm pretty sure at least one of them has asperger's.
-
I'm pretty sure at least one of them has asperger's.
What does that have to do with any of this?
-
What does that have to do with any of this?
It has a little to do with it. Relax.
-
You don't believe in invincible ignorance, Baptism of Blood, or Baptism of Desire? Seriously? BoB and BoD are literally taught in the Catechism of the Council of Trent.
I know, "Feeneyism", which many hold to.
BUT I thought that denial of BoB, BoD was a strawman distortion of what Fr. Feeney taught. One of the things I've learned on CI over the years...
There are many here who "don't believe in . . . Baptism of Desire," despite it being "literally taught in the Caterchism of the Council of Trent."
Seriously.
Lad and Stubborn come most immediately to mind.
-
It has a little to do with it. Relax.
Asking a question is not generally indicative of a lack of being relaxed, and definitely is not in this instance.
Apparently you should "relax."
-
There are many here who "don't believe in . . . Baptism of Desire," despite it being "literally taught in the Caterchism of the Council of Trent."
Seriously.
Lad and Stubborn come most immediately to mind.
It's not taught in the Catechism, but we've spent many pages debating it. Catechism merely states that there isn't the same danger for adults as for infants (in terms of needing to be baptized ASAP in all cases) because their intention to receive Baptism would prevail over any obstacles that might get in the way (subjunctive mood), and the language is nearly identical to that of St. Fulgentius who completed the sentence in saying ... "because God would make sure they don't die before receiving the Sacrament" on account of said intention.
-
Here's my opinion on the Dimonds --
In a better world, the Dimonds would be arrested by the State and/or the Church and all their "apostolate" websites/materials taken offline. They would be tried for heresy.
Well, it's the 95% of Trads who believe that non-Catholics can be saved that should be tried for (and convicted of) heresy, not the Dimonds. Only a minority of theologians hold that BoD is de fide, and they do so mistakenly.
Dimonds do great work against an onslaught of people, including the vast majority of Trads, who don't actually believe in the dogma that there's no salvation outside the Church. If the Dimond Brothers are in error on this point (and I disagree with their calling all articulations of BoD heretical per se ... even as I disagree that it's de fide), their error is far less grave than that of these Trads who openly reject EENS, often publicly from the pulpit.
Not to mention that these Trads have absolutely no clue about the actual root error of Vatican II, and that in holding that non-Catholics can be saved, they actually hold the same ecclesiology that's articulated by Vatican II.
-
Unfortunately despite the recent videos in which the dimonds were more charitable it seems they have doubled down on their magicians video (or at least the social media handler).
https://twitter.com/DeoVolente019/status/1755574918404620602
Let's take the example of the guy floating in the air on the beach.
Since you seem to believe that is not magic but some sort of trick you should be able to come up with a reasonable explanation of how he is flying.
I'd venture to say that since this phenomenon exists for a long time and is well known you should be able to point to a demonstration on how it is done and how to repeat it.
Of course, you can't, because floating in the air is impossible without supernatural assistance.
Any number of supposed tricks from the video are likewise unexplainable naturally.
-
Unfortunately despite the recent videos in which the dimonds were more charitable it seems they have doubled down on their magicians video (or at least the social media handler).
https://twitter.com/DeoVolente019/status/1755574918404620602
https://twitter.com/TRUTHACRUSADA/status/1755503050800730341
Also from the guy in the first link, he said elsewhere that he is part of a new sedevacantist group. Website is below, I haven't read through all of it but I have this seen site before but the design and name has changed and much more articles have been added. It seems they are against invincible ignorance, baptism of blood and desire. This is nice, at least for me, as I have not seen any other groups than the Dimonds to be against these 3 things.
https://cognitioecclesiae.weebly.com/
I would hardly call it a "group". It's probably just one guy who put up a website. Yet, the guy with the creepy All-Seeing-Eye logo (used by both Satanists and Masons) is attacking the Dimond Brothers for their show on the magicians (which are, IMO, very solid). And then on his website he features two letters written by St. Athanasius to a Bishop Lucifer (who, though he seemed like an upstanding and orthodox Catholic bishop), why are they focusing on Lucifer when the same content from St. Athanasius could be found elsewhere.
So, given the following:
1) Satanic/Masonic logo
2) Focus on a Bishop Lucifier
3) attacking the Dimond Brothers for calling out the occult nature of modern magic
I suspect that this is some kind of diabolical ruse and would stay FAR away from these clowns, and that he (or they) is nothing but a demonic clown. Of all the things to attack the Dimond Brothers for, it's to defend and justify modern "magic" when about 1/3 of the video cites the guys themselves that they're cooperating with demons or other entities to perform their tricks, which are in fact inexplicable apart from total CGI camera tricks ... except that many/most of them were performed in front of live audiences.
-
The only good the Dimonds have to offer
I personally know a handful of converts that came to Traditionalism (from other faiths) due to the Diamonds. All converts were men.
The Diamonds are a little nutty on some things, and I don't like their constant anathemas of heresy, but...in our overly feminized, wishy-washy, "maybe, sometimes" world, the Diamonds presentation of the Faith as "yes, yes and no, no" speaks to people, mostly men. It works. Can't argue with results.
-
I personally know a handful of converts that came to Traditionalism (from other faiths) due to the Diamonds. All converts were men.
The Diamonds are a little nutty on some things, and I don't like their constant anathemas of heresy, but...in our overly feminized, wishy-washy, "maybe, sometimes" world, the Diamonds presentation of the Faith as "yes, yes and no, no" speaks to people, mostly men. It works. Can't argue with results.
Yes, and they've softened somewhat in recent times with the anathemas, but darn it if we don't need to hear it. There's a prevailing tendency in modern times, even among Trads, that heresy is "no big deal," since everything depends on "sincerity". Well, he probably "means well," so that's all that matters. It's the same subjectivist nonsense that has led to most modern errors, as well as the phenomenology that Bishop Williamson has expertly taught about, where ideas don't matter, are subjective, and that sincerity and meaning well and being "nithe" (as Bishop Williamson mockingly pronounces it) are all that count. Sometimes the Dimond Brothers do a service by calling a spade a spade and not performing some mealy-mouthed dance around it.
One need only look at the writings of the Fathers and the Councils, with all the anathemas they've hurled, to understand how seriously heresy was taken by them. Some of the language St. Jerome uses towards heretics would make anything we've seen posted by the Dimonds tame by comparison. It's important not to slide into a bitter zeal, but that can't be at the cost of going soft on heresy, since it destroys souls.
-
Sometimes the Dimond Brothers do a service by calling a spade a spade and not performing some mealy-mouthed dance around it.
Yes. It used to be that this is what attracted many to Catholicism -- principles and truth. Yes or no. Black or white. V2's "springtime" threw away the harsh realities of the summer heat and the winter cold, and put flowers and lukewarm temperatures everywhere (to continue my horrible analogy). People inherently hate wishy-washyness and that's why people no longer take catholicism seriously...because there's no lofty goals of sainthood to strive for, and there's no dread of eternal pains in hell to suffer anymore. The Diamonds remind people that truths matter in a serious way and following this way has meaning.
-
It's not taught in the Catechism, but we've spent many pages debating it. Catechism merely states that there isn't the same danger for adults as for infants (in terms of needing to be baptized ASAP in all cases) because their intention to receive Baptism would prevail over any obstacles that might get in the way (subjunctive mood), and the language is nearly identical to that of St. Fulgentius who completed the sentence in saying ... "because God would make sure they don't die before receiving the Sacrament" on account of said intention.
Yeah, we've discussed this over and over. I was not inviting another debate on that much traveled ground, but merely quoting Matthew, who thinks (as I do) that BoD is taught in the Catechism.
-
Yeah, we've discussed this over and over. I was not inviting another debate on that much traveled ground, but merely quoting Matthew, who thinks (as I do) that BoD is taught in the Catechism.
Sounds good. We needn't digress again (for the 20th time).
-
If I'm trying to explain BOD to the average Catholic/Normie, I would say "There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, that is a Dogma." and then not say much after that. I am not a theologian.
BOD and BOB should be left to God's judgment. Something we should not "promote" as the V2 wrongly interprets this. I believe it just confuses people. Council of Trent teaches BOD/BOB if I'm not mistaken.
-
Some of the language St. Jerome uses towards heretics would make anything we've seen posted by the Dimonds tame by comparison. It's important not to slide into a bitter zeal, but that can't be at the cost of going soft on heresy, since it destroys souls.
There are several problems with this.
1. "Just make sure to avoid bitter zeal?" With the Dimond Brothers, that ship has already sailed. I don't have a problem with St. Athanasius or any other hard-line Trad Catholic (including before the qualifier "Trad" was needed for a Catholic). I'm not after mealy-mouth, nitheness, limp-wristedness, or mincing words. What I WOULD like is the Truth, without any poison mixed in. And dogmatic Home Aloneism ("There is no good Trad group out there to attend Mass with", or the same thing "except these 2 priests") is worse than the Novus Ordo in my opinion.
2. Attacking HERESY and HERETICS is one thing. Attacking all and sundry TRAD/real Catholics? Anathamatizing countless good Catholics, as if you're a Pope with an itchy trigger finger? That's another story. That's why I have NO use for the Dimond Brothers.
Whatever "good" they have done/are doing are being done MUCH BETTER, WITHOUT THE POISON, by countless other priests and bishops (and Trad groups). We don't need the Dimonds. If they were shut down, the world would be a better place.
As for those who "converted" because of the Dimond Brothers, just remember God can bring good out of evil, like the Crucifixion of Christ. Did Pontius Pilate do a good deed for humanity? Of course not.
You show me 10 people who "converted" because of the Dimond Brothers, I'll show you 10 men who would have converted just as well if they had stumbled onto ANOTHER Trad website in their online sleuthing instead, if Dimond Bros had been shut down (as I fervently wish for to this day). And in fact, they'd be better off, since they'd have found the Truth WITHOUT bitter zeal, schism, heresy, error, Home Aloneism, and other garbage mixed in. They'd end up better Trad Catholics if they had clicked on "the next" search result, whatever they would have clicked on if Dimond Bros hadn't been there.
-
Yes. It used to be that this is what attracted many to Catholicism -- principles and truth. Yes or no. Black or white. V2's "springtime" threw away the harsh realities of the summer heat and the winter cold, and put flowers and lukewarm temperatures everywhere (to continue my horrible analogy). People inherently hate wishy-washyness and that's why people no longer take catholicism seriously...because there's no lofty goals of sainthood to strive for, and there's no dread of eternal pains in hell to suffer anymore. The Diamonds remind people that truths matter in a serious way and following this way has meaning.
Even in the secular arena, this is one of the main reasons people (well, conservatives) really like Trump, because Trump just speaks his mind and is blunt, and people have gotten sick of the mealy-mouthed "politician" non-answers to every question, where they're holding up their fingers to see which way the winds are blowing before answering, or not answering (with many words).
-
That's a great analogy, Lad.
Dimond Brothers are like Trump.
But you see, I'm not a huge fan of Trump, for countless reasons. Sure, Trump speaks some truth now and then, in a world STARVED for the truth. But is he a good man, or a solution? Should he be the President, objectively speaking?
Think about it.
-
That's a great analogy, Lad.
Dimond Brothers are like Trump.
But you see, I'm not a huge fan of Trump, for countless reasons. Sure, Trump speaks some truth now and then, in a world STARVED for the truth. But is he a good man, or a solution? Should he be the President, objectively speaking?
Think about it.
Well, I'm not a fan of Trump because he doesn't actually follow through on his bluster, his suspect personal morality, his subservience to Israel, and his yuge but fragile ego. I don't dislike Trump because of his style, though. Like most, I find his bluntness refreshing.
-
Dimond Brothers are like Trump.
But you see, I'm not a huge fan of Trump, for countless reasons.
The Diamond Bros are like Trump...if he were Catholic. If Trump's "style" was used to spread the Faith, then he would be a great preacher. The Diamonds are blunt, short and factual.
Regular politicians are like +Fellay, who says "I like 95% of V2", while white-washing the 5% that's deadly. He's confusing, non-genuine and swarmy.
Both the Diamond Bros and Fellay have the Faith, but the way it's presented to non-catholics is night and day.
-
Let's take the example of the guy floating in the air on the beach.
Since you seem to believe that is not magic but some sort of trick you should be able to come up with a reasonable explanation of how he is flying.
I'd venture to say that since this phenomenon exists for a long time and is well known you should be able to point to a demonstration on how it is done and how to repeat it.
Of course, you can't, because floating in the air is impossible without supernatural assistance.
Any number of supposed tricks from the video are likewise unexplainable naturally.
.
The nature of a trick is that it is something that appears to be impossible, so obviously it would have to be something that the average person (or most people) cannot explain. Otherwise it wouldn't be a trick, and it wouldn't be something anyone would pay money to see.
I tried to look at the image you are talking about, but Twitter said the page no longer exists.
Anyway, we are supposed to assume there is a natural explanation for something unless the contrary is proved. The magic video was a complete embarrassment. I watched a few of the more famous tricks that they claimed were impossible, and with a simple Google search I found out in 30 seconds how the trick was done. Like the guy who walked on the Thames river in London. The Demons said it was satanic. With a quick search I discovered that the guy put little platforms of transparent plastic right below the surface of the river, and that's what he was standing on when he walked on the Thames.
There were several other tricks they mentioned that I did the same thing.
You've never been to a magic show? Do you think it's possible to actually saw a lady in half or pull a rabbit out of a hat? I don't think so, but that doesn't mean those people are devil-worshipers.
-
.
The nature of a trick is that it is something that appears to be impossible, so obviously it would have to be something that the average person (or most people) cannot explain. Otherwise it wouldn't be a trick, and it wouldn't be something anyone would pay money to see.
I tried to look at the image you are talking about, but Twitter said the page no longer exists.
Anyway, we are supposed to assume there is a natural explanation for something unless the contrary is proved. The magic video was a complete embarrassment. I watched a few of the more famous tricks that they claimed were impossible, and with a simple Google search I found out in 30 seconds how the trick was done. Like the guy who walked on the Thames river in London. The Demons said it was satanic. With a quick search I discovered that the guy put little platforms of transparent plastic right below the surface of the river, and that's what he was standing on when he walked on the Thames.
There were several other tricks they mentioned that I did the same thing.
You've never been to a magic show? Do you think it's possible to actually saw a lady in half or pull a rabbit out of a hat? I don't think so, but that doesn't mean those people are devil-worshipers.
"I found a nickel behind your ear. Look at that!"
Looks like I'm a Satanist. :laugh1::laugh1:
-
"I found a nickel behind your ear. Look at that!"
Looks like I'm a Satanist. :laugh1::laugh1:
Ridiculous. People with your attitude beg the question that people don't make these deals with demons, almost showing a lack of faith in the invisible preternatural world, and also naively thinking that the world isn't filled with Satanists and Luciferians. Those videos are filled with magicians talking about how they work with demons and have made deals with demons to perform their "magic", and the vast majority of what's on the film could not be accomplished by natural means ... if they aren't 100% CGI, except that a great many of them are performed publicly, often out in the open where there's nothing above but the sky, precluding the use of wires, etc.
Watch that one 5-hour video about the Satanists/Masons put out by the former X-Factor winner in Australia where he lays it all out, about how the vast majority of the entertainers and politicians are engaged with the occult.
-
Anyway, we are supposed to assume there is a natural explanation for something unless the contrary is proved.
Ridiculous, and it's quite the opposite. You assume that there is a natural explanation until proven otherwise, but unless these demons materialize you'd never be satisfied. Apart from CGI and camera tricks, there's simply no natural explanation for most of what's shown in the video. In many cases, camera tricks can be ruled out because the stunts are performed publicly and in front of very large crowds.
Some posters here have very little actual believe in the spiritual world, that there are demons everywhere, and that many performers cut deal with demons in order to become rich and famous.
-
I personally know a handful of converts that came to Traditionalism (from other faiths) due to the Diamonds. All converts were men.
The Diamonds are a little nutty on some things, and I don't like their constant anathemas of heresy, but...in our overly feminized, wishy-washy, "maybe, sometimes" world, the Diamonds presentation of the Faith as "yes, yes and no, no" speaks to people, mostly men. It works. Can't argue with results.
I'm one of those converts. Someone had posted a link to their Steven Anderson docuмentary on 4chan, which is how I found out about them years ago. Even though I had an anti-Catholic bias during that time due to my Baptist Bible Belt upbringing, I still watched the video because Steven Anderson annoyed me (some people on 4chan would constantly shill for him, which sparked my annoyance). It was well worth it, because Peter Dimond was able to thoroughly dismantle Steven Anderson's wicked errors using the Bible alone. Every citation from scripture I double checked in my KJV, and sure enough it lined up. After that video, I became more interested in learning about traditional Catholicism. Eventually I moved on past them because there were some red flags in the back of my mind about them, but it took a while to move past them as I was slowly discerning truth in the sea of trad chaos. If I would have remained a dogmatic Dimondite, I would have never started attending Mass or properly learned the faith. The value of the sacraments cannot be understated!!!
It's just too bad that the Dimonds espouse some errors, because their orthodox material is some of the best online that I've found. Their apologetics against non-Catholics is very compelling, and their blunt delivery is refreshing in a world where people constantly beat around the bush.
-
It's just too bad that the Dimonds espouse some errors, because their orthodox material is some of the best online that I've found. Their apologetics against non-Catholics is very compelling, and their blunt delivery is refreshing in a world where people constantly beat around the bush.
Agreed. To me, the only significant error they hold is in assigning the note of heresy to BoD per se (rather than just its extension), since it's clear that the Church has long tolerated the opinion, and there no direct smoking-gun contradiction with defined dogma. I do agree with them that BoD doesn't exist (except in the St. Ambrose sense of "washing but not crowning", or Father Feeney's justification but no salvation), that there's no need for it, and its extension has caused irreparable harm to EENS dogma, just not with the conclusion that everyone who believes in BoD, including those who limit it to Catechumens and the like are therefore heretics. Apart from that I have a few smaller disagreements, i.e. about whether JP2 was THE Antichrist ... but that's just opinion and neither here nor there for me. I also find some of their arguments to be logically faulty, even if I don't disagree with the overall conclusion (sometimes for other reasons). They used to be far too bitter, but they have certainly softened their tone of late, while remaining very blunt and direct (which I too find refreshing).
-
I went to that website, and instantly my screen was covered with a gigantic image of the masonic all-seeing eye in the pyramid, like on the back of the $1 bill.
That appears to be their logo.
The whole site gives me the creeps. Who are these people?
The eye of providence is (was) a Catholic symbol, you will notice it in a lot of Catholic art. Though I do find off putting they chose such an eerie red and black version.
-
I hope I'm misunderstanding you, and I really, honestly HATE TO SAY this, but...
You don't believe in invincible ignorance, Baptism of Blood, or Baptism of Desire? Seriously? BoB and BoD are literally taught in the Catechism of the Council of Trent.
I know, "Feeneyism", which many hold to.
BUT I thought that denial of BoB, BoD was a strawman distortion of what Fr. Feeney taught. One of the things I've learned on CI over the years...
And you seem to be a few notches more favorable towards the Dimonds than you should be. And a bit too excited about this "All Seeing Eye" creepy group. Is it because of the aforementioned "novel" beliefs about BoB and BoD? You seem forced by your odd belief(s) to make common cause with some really shady groups. I'm going by your own words -- you seem desperate for some group(s) that agree with your "position". So you'll take what you can get.
Here's my opinion on the Dimonds --
In a better world, the Dimonds would be arrested by the State and/or the Church and all their "apostolate" websites/materials taken offline. They would be tried for heresy.
The only good the Dimonds have to offer (like the lemonade in a 98% lemonade 2% cyanide cocktail) is their stuff on non-controversial subjects, like Evolution or Creation. We probably also agree on Abortion, sex education, and the general depravity of the Modern World. MAYBE a bit on what happened at Vatican II. But even that is a bit hazy.
(EDIT: I misread Catechism of Trent for just Council of Trent, though the Catechism also does not teach it)
No they are not, nowhere does Trent mention anything about a baptism of blood, and even baptism of desire is an assumption. Just because the council uses the term 'desire' does not mean it refers baptism of desire. This is an assumption due to the speculations of some Saints.
I can mention Saint Peter Canisius who was at the Council, yet in his catechism at the relevant section which people misinterpret and read in baptism of desire, he does not make mention of it and even goes so far to quote Saint Augustine and St Ambrose on the necessity of WATER baptism.
You say I am biased towards groups that reject heretical garbage like salvation outside the Church by the Church or salvation in invincible ignorance (which the Church never taught and scripture refutes) and you are correct. Unfortunately I have not see many trad group who reject these errors. So far I haven't seen any glaring errors from this new group, though dislike their version of the eye of providence they used.
On the contrary I will say that you and most trads are biased towards invincible ignorance and BoD/BoB simply because Archbishop Lefebvre taught it. His statements in which he denied EENS were heretical, regardless of whatever good things he did trying to hold to tradition.
The Church has numerous dogmatic statements on water baptism, that all the new testament saints were baptised, that only those baptised and profess the truth faith are members of the Church and that even if one sheds their blood they can't be saved unless they are members of the Church. The logical conclusion is that BoD and BoB are false doctrines.
-
The Dimonds played a major role in my conversion also. I love their style. What can I say? 🤷♂️ They made it plain for me to make the decision to stop being an “indulter” and be an actual Catholic. And they promote the rosary a ton. My Godfather and I use a phrase to describe The Dimonds and others like them. Haha. “Straight up black coffee!” 😆 although the Dimonds might be better described as a shot of espresso.
And I love the Dimond video on the magicians. Is everything in stage or street magic performed with the help of demons? I’d wager no. HOWEVER, the posters and pictures of magicians with demons whispering in their ears seems to explain how some of these guys are able to “read minds.” That part is sort of terrifying to me. I think demons are essential to a top selling magicians act at the end of the day.
The other part from the Dimond video that intrigued me was that magician Dynamo and his name being taken from Manly P Halls book. Dynamo uses “heat” from his hand to impress an image of it into glass… it is an inversion of that story of the soul in purgatory doing something similar into a piece of wood. The Burnt Hand of Foligno: https://newspapers.bc.edu/?a=d&d=BOSTONSH18940707-01.2.77&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN------- (https://newspapers.bc.edu/?a=d&d=BOSTONSH18940707-01.2.77&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN-------)
-
The Dimonds played a major role in my conversion also. I love their style. What can I say? 🤷♂️ They made it plain for me to make the decision to stop being an “indulter” and be an actual Catholic. And they promote the rosary a ton. My Godfather and I use a phrase to describe The Dimonds and others like them. Haha. “Straight up black coffee!” 😆 although the Dimonds might be better described as a shot of espresso.
And I love the Dimond video on the magicians. Is everything in stage or street magic performed with the help of demons? I’d wager no. HOWEVER, the posters and pictures of magicians with demons whispering in their ears seems to explain how some of these guys are able to “read minds.” That part is sort of terrifying to me. I think demons are essential to a top selling magicians act at the end of the day.
The other part from the Dimond video that intrigued me was that magician Dynamo and his name being taken from Manly P Halls book. Dynamo uses “heat” from his hand to impress an image of it into glass… it is an inversion of that story of the soul in purgatory doing something similar into a piece of wood. The Burnt Hand of Foligno: https://newspapers.bc.edu/?a=d&d=BOSTONSH18940707-01.2.77&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN------- (https://newspapers.bc.edu/?a=d&d=BOSTONSH18940707-01.2.77&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN-------)
I agree with you and was also converted by the content the Dimonds put out. The main thing with the OP post is that the Dimonds to not handle criticism well. A lot of the tricks can be explained with natural reasons after some googling, their response to such criticism is one of the issues they have overall as this is not a one time thing.
-
I love their style. What can I say? 🤷♂️
Agreed. It's refreshing, honest, blunt ... and showing no human respect. While everyone else pussy-foots around heresy these days, the Dimond Brothers administer the verbal beating with fists that St. Pius X said was needed for Modernists.
-
The Dimonds played a major role in my conversion also. I love their style. What can I say? 🤷♂️ They made it plain for me to make the decision to stop being an “indulter” and be an actual Catholic. And they promote the rosary a ton. My Godfather and I use a phrase to describe The Dimonds and others like them. Haha. “Straight up black coffee!” 😆 although the Dimonds might be better described as a shot of espresso.
:laugh1:
They played a major role in my husband's conversion as well, and his conversion played a huge role in mine. I'm not a "Dimond fan", but I'm also not a "Dimond hater" either.
-
The main thing with the OP post is that the Dimonds to not handle criticism well. A lot of the tricks can be explained with natural reasons after some googling, their response to such criticism is one of the issues they have overall as this is not a one time thing.
I agree with the first point, disagree with the second. Yes, the Dimond Brothers could do better to deal with criticism, but one has to realized that no personalities related to Traditional Catholicism have been more hated, more attacked, and more maligned than the Dimond Brothers.
As for natural reasons for "a lot" of the tricks shown in their videos, I disagree. There's always tons of speculation out there about how some tricks are done, but they nearly always fall short. I recently saw one where they were trying to explain how Copperfield is going to make the moon "disappear", and all the proposed explanations were lame.
For nearly all the material in the Dimonds' video about the magicians, barring total CGI or camera tricks, there's no plausible natural explanation for them ... and in many cases that's ruled out by live audiences and public performances. We have the magicians themselves boasting of how they work with entities, spirits, and some cases they admit demons, in performing their tricks.
-
And what exactly is wrong with their response? They're right. We see it in action on this thread.
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Pt. I, Q. 110, A. 4, Reply to Obj. 2: “So when the demons do anything of their own natural power, these things are called miracles not in an absolute sense, but in reference to ourselves. In this way the magicians work miracles through the demons; and these are said to be done by private contracts…”
St. John Eudes, Man's Contract With God In Baptism, 17th century: “… those who hold communication with him [i.e. the Devil]; such as sorcerers, magicians, or those who cure diseases, extinguish fires, and do other similar acts by his operation.”
Our two-hour docuмentary on magicians provides abundant evidence that many top magicians do things that are preternatural and require the assistance of evil spirits. Of course, as our video acknowledged, that’s not to say that every alleged ‘magic trick’ is spiritual. There are obviously tricks performed by deception and sleight-of-hand. But the top magicians regularly do MANY things (i.e. thousands of things) that require the assistance of evil spirits. Many people can recognize this obvious fact when they see the evidence. However, some people (including some who claim to be Catholic) simply cannot accept this, and they aggressively attack the idea. That’s because they have no supernatural faith whatsoever, and they cannot believe that such a thing could actually be happening in public in front of people. Yes, it is. Many of those people think they are wise and clever, and that those who claim magicians are doing anything with the assistance of evil spirits are fools. It’s just the opposite. Those people are utterly blind fools who cannot perceive basic reality and are duped by the stupid, non-explanations that a few people post online (which attempt to explain how certain things are performed naturally but don't actually explain it when you carefully scrutinize the supposed explanations). What those people also ignore or don’t know is that saints throughout history recognized that demonic magicians perform such feats with the assistance of spirits. This video shares a few quotes on that matter: https://endtimes.video/catholic-saints-against-magicians/
The fact that magicians can do this is also of course mentioned in the Book of Exodus. Why wouldn’t it be happening today, when the Devil is more active than in any other period of history?
There's nothing wrong with this response, and I agree with them 100%. For every famous magic trick, you can find a dozen speculative "stupid, non-explanations" that a few jokers post online that fail to explain the trick, and often contradict one another and, as the Brothers point out, "don't actually explain it when you carefully scrutinize the supposed explanations". Those too are driven by the compulsive need to reject the possibility of anything preter-natural.
Now, the one place where they exaggerate is where they claim that these types (several on this thread) have "no supernatural faith whatsoever", as someone can have supernatural faith, even if it's very weak.
What happens here is that we have people that refuse to admit that such things are possible and then apply confirmation bias to accepting the lame explanations people throw out there, which in turn also are motivated by a refusal to admit the existence of a spiritual non-visible creation.
-
I don't understand why anyone would claim that all magic tricks are explainable/not aided by the Devil, demons etc. Just take a look at the supposed Novus Ordo "miracles".
-
I'll give just one example of a lame/stupid explanation. So, with regard to the levitation while touching a stick, someone posted the video of an Oriental guy who made this apparatus out of a solid metal frame that was attached through his sleeve, etc. So this required a solid metal apparatus and required contact with the shovel he was using in lieu of a wooden stick.
But the examples in the Dimond video featuring the one guy who did this trick showed him picking up his mat and moving to a different location ... no apparatus to be seen, just a simple mat, and then at a different time, not using any kind of stick but just putting his hand on some man's head, and also at other times holding onto nothing. Even the posters on the video of the woman doing it on the street pointed out that the explanation doesn't work, because that woman also LET GO of her stick where you could see separation between her hand and the stick ... which is not possible given the Oriental guy's apparatus that "explains" it.
So here's one epic fail explanation. And the same holds of probably 98% of them, where people who refuse to believe in the invisible world and that individuals make deals with the devil, accept these explanations due to prior confirmation bias without actually looking into the flaws and problems with the explanation. It's the same thing with the Flat Earth issue, where confirmation bias and prior belief seems to filter out all rationality.
-
I don't understand why anyone would claim that all magic tricks are explainable/not aided by the Devil, demons etc. Just take a look at the supposed Novus Ordo "miracles".
I understand. It's precisely because of what the Dimond Brothers said, that people have very little actual faith in the invisible world, and so the assume there MUST be some natural explanation for ALL magic tricks, and so in their confirmation bias they filter out the possibility that demons could be involved. Satanists/Luciferians are EVERYWHERE today. On the Dimond video, many of them admit as much and boast of their cooperation with demons. One guy in particular (Dynamo) was a lame nothing of a magician, and one of his close friends testified that after he had a close brush with death (due to a medical condition), he became obsessed with not dying before being remembered and making a name for himself, and that he went out into the woods for some days, "made some deal with the devil", and came back somehow doing astonishing tricks and becoming famous. Many of them admit to studying the occult and witchcraft, and conjuring demons. Some of them admit to studying Voodoo and participating in Voodoo rites where dead people were animated. We have Catholic missionaries who attest to the diabolical Voodoo practices they encountered.
Many of them also blaphemously do parodies of Our Lord's miracles: walking on water, making fish and loaves appear out of nothing, levitating in the air while posing in the manner of Our Lord on the cross, referring to levitation as their "Ascension", and the one guy calling himself "Jabreezus" and making his own "Scripture" verses. This is all being done by the demons not because they want to do some favors for these magicians, but because they want to disparage the miracles performed by Our Lord. "Look, these guys doing the same things that Jesus is said to have done. Jesus too was nothing but a street magician (performing His tricks using the same allegedly natural techniques)." That's the entire point of this, to disparage Our Lord's miracles.
-
One other example. They show a "Magic Secrets Revealed" episode allegedly showing how Copperfield walked through the Great Wall of China.
That's an epic fail.
They claim that a double slips into the curtained area. Problem: For Copperfield, there were observers on top of the Great Wall who would have seen this.
They claim that the actual magician slips into a trapped door into an area beneath the platform. Problem: there was clearly no area beneath the platform, since you could see the assistants through the bottom on the other side.
They claim that the magician gets wheeled away in the stairs leading up to the platform. Problem: you can see that the stairs are just stairs and there's no way a person could fit into them (there's no hidden compartment in the stair).
They claim that they wheel the stairs around the other side of the wall (they used some shipping containers to simulate). Problem: Great Wall of China is miles long and there's no way to simply wheel Copperfield around to the other side. They would have had to lift him over the wall somehow, but again there were observers on top who would have seen him come back in.
In the alleged explanation, they rely on the fact that the observers could only see one side of the apparatus, but there were observers all around it for Copperfield, on compartments under the platform and in the staircase, being wheeled around to the other side, none of which would have been possible for the Copperfield version.
Copperfield admits to holding the largest collection of occult artifacts in the world (valued at hundreds of millions of dollars), including many books on magic, witchcraft, and sorcery.
So the "Magic Secrets Revealed" alleged explanation is an epic fail and does not come close to explaining Copperfield's version.
-
These are just two examples of the lame, stupid non-explanations that are easily debunked. People, however, assume ahead of time that there MUST be a natural explanation, and so they're ready to believe these things even though upon closer scrutiny they fail miserably.
-
The Dimonds played a major role in my conversion also. I love their style. What can I say? 🤷♂️ They made it plain for me to make the decision to stop being an “indulter” and be an actual Catholic. And they promote the rosary a ton. My Godfather and I use a phrase to describe The Dimonds and others like them. Haha. “Straight up black coffee!” 😆 although the Dimonds might be better described as a shot of espresso.
And I love the Dimond video on the magicians. Is everything in stage or street magic performed with the help of demons? I’d wager no. HOWEVER, the posters and pictures of magicians with demons whispering in their ears seems to explain how some of these guys are able to “read minds.” That part is sort of terrifying to me. I think demons are essential to a top selling magicians act at the end of the day.
The other part from the Dimond video that intrigued me was that magician Dynamo and his name being taken from Manly P Halls book. Dynamo uses “heat” from his hand to impress an image of it into glass… it is an inversion of that story of the soul in purgatory doing something similar into a piece of wood. The Burnt Hand of Foligno: https://newspapers.bc.edu/?a=d&d=BOSTONSH18940707-01.2.77&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN------- (https://newspapers.bc.edu/?a=d&d=BOSTONSH18940707-01.2.77&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN-------)
I would agree that “Dimond production’s” topics are quite interesting and relevant to the trad Catholic scene, yet I still classify them as “dark sedes”.
The meaning of “dark sede” is, in their theology, everything… all trad Sacraments are invalid.
Over the years, they have surely monitored their audience and adjusted and perfected their writing craft to present popular articles.
But their fishy, non Catholic origins and dark sede agenda is what concerns me.
For example:
I recently revisited their archives for their classic Fatima article of 2006, where they made the slickest set of arguments claiming the Fatima consecration was a done deal.
This article is a masterpiece of deceit. I’m sure they never renounced their position on it.
A priest once told me one of his Louisiana parishioners tried to set an appointment to visit the Dimond compound.
No way we’re they going to allow anyone to see their monastic “writers shop.”
Like most Marrano media operations (Mikey Voris, Taylor (jew) Marshall, the Dimonds are positioned to divert, mislead and to put us into despair.
Based on their profound level of media output, I’ve always envisioned the Dimond monastery to be filled jew writers and kippah headed video producers 😉
-
The meaning of “dark sede” is, in their theology, everything… all trad Sacraments are invalid.
What? They've never held any such thing. In fact, for some years they were even going to Eastern Rite to receive the Sacraments.
-
What? They've never held any such thing. In fact, for some years they were even going to Eastern Rite to receive the Sacraments.
They surely have.
Your disagreement with me on this important point is similar to your insistence that Gerry Matatics did not evangelize the same.
It is well known that Gerry (another Dark sede) didn’t seek a priest for his wife’s last Sacraments because he and she held them to be invalid.
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.Rpk7leCufTsd07YdxhpVOAHaE8%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=1b9e30c71020f927722e96a4c9ff53e5b33dc5deec37897b086aee286e0892f5&ipo=images)
-
They surely have.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Dimond Brothers have never held that "all Trad Sacraments are invalid". They've certainly held that most (nearly all) Trad groups have embraced and promoted heresy, but that has nothing whatsoever do do with the validity of their Sacraments. They obviously realize that it would be heretical to claim that heretics cannot have valid Sacraments.
-
The meaning of “dark sede” is, in their theology, everything… all trad Sacraments are invalid.
Can you provide a quote?
It is my understanding that they no longer assist at any mass, but I do not believe it is because they think the trad sacraments are "invalid". At best, if they are truly "home-aloners", then they would think the sacraments are "illicit" and that it would be a mortal sin to assist at one.
I used the search function on their site. When you type in "Invalid", you get articles pertaining to the New Rites. When I typed in "sacraments", I found this file. Unfortunately, it is dated 2014:
Where To Receive Sacraments (schismatic-home-aloner.com)
(https://schismatic-home-aloner.com/where-to-receive-sacraments/)Here, their issue focuses on what the priests teach, not their ordination rite.
-
It is my understanding that they no longer assist at any mass, but I do not believe it is because they think the trad sacraments are "invalid". At best, if they are truly "home-aloners", then they would think the sacraments are "illicit" and that it would be a mortal sin to assist at one.
Your understanding is correct.
-
https://twitter.com/AntiDimondWatch/status/1766483615662125439
So St. John Bosco did 'magic' tricks. I don't think every trick is demonic though many magicians do make demonic pacts.
-
https://twitter.com/AntiDimondWatch/status/1766483615662125439
So St. John Bosco did 'magic' tricks. I don't think every trick is demonic though many magicians do make demonic pacts.
Do you have a point? Dimonds clearly stated right out of the gate that not all “magic” involves diabolical forces. You’re creating a strawman here by implying that they believe this.
At least 95% of what they show on the video is almost certainly diabolical … short of camera tricks and “audiences” that were completely in on it. Many of the “magicians” openly admit and even boast about working with various spirits and even demons.
-
I went through the two main alleged “debunking” videos and pointed out how they don’t come close to explaining the actual tricks shown by the Dimonds.
1) one guy built a metal apparatus to simulate the street levitation … but there’s clearly no apparatus involved in the actual tricks shown, as they move locations, without any sign of an apparatus … and the one guy used someone’s head at one point
2) wall of China debunk showed the magician going inside the stairs and then being wheeled around the other side of a shipping container. But you can clearly see that there’s no compartment beneath the stairs or the platform in Copperfield’s version and no way to wheel him around or through the wall of China ( which is not a relatively small shipping container)
-
This guy...(he's a V2 supporter but I did laugh at a couple of his parody videos.)
https://www.youtube.com/@Deuterocomical/videos
...is supposed to debunk the Dimonds magicians videos (he talks about it in this comment section...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3OapYq-1yE)
...under the "You're a fool" comment) and has stated he challenged the Dimonds to a debate on the matter and they have not accepted (or rejected) apparently his e-mail challenge was ignored.
I'm interested in what he can supposedly debunk but I think Dimonds did a very solid video on these and don't really think they can be debunked on (most or all of) this. Won't be surprised if he just sets up and attacks strawmen. I do think one or two of the tricks covered could be explainable by natural means but I have no doubt many of these people are actually sorcerors that made a deal with the devil.
-
I'm interested in what he can supposedly debunk but I think Dimonds did a very solid video on these and don't really think they can be debunked on (most or all of) this. Won't be surprised if he just sets up and attacks strawmen. I do think one or two of the tricks covered could be explainable by natural means but I have no doubt many of these people are actually sorcerors that made a deal with the devil.
That was a humorous parody video. I went through the alleged debunking threads on Twitter and found the two examples they gave to be ludicrious, not even coming close to explaining what we saw. Barring some extreme camera trickery and audiences who were "in on" it, at least 90% of these can't be explained other than through diabolical agency. On top of that, many (if not most) of the magicians featured in the Dimond video boasted of working with "entities", and some explicitly calling them demons.
-
That was a humorous parody video. I went through the alleged debunking threads on Twitter and found the two examples they gave to be ludicrious, not even coming close to explaining what we saw. Barring some extreme camera trickery and audiences who were "in on" it, at least 90% of these can't be explained other than through diabolical agency. On top of that, many (if not most) of the magicians featured in the Dimond video boasted of working with "entities", and some explicitly calling them demons.
Yeah, there will always be the scoffers who just don't want to believe and they say that the sorcerors were "kidding" when they say stuff like working with demons and such. Basically they will make every excuse to not believe that these people are diabolically influenced or that evil demons exist.
-
The "Deuterocomical" guy actually did release a video trying to debunk Dimonds magician video. It's about an hour long. I haven't seen it yet but am going to give it a view but I'm guessing he attacks some strawmen or only attacks one or two points and claims victory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdXPoTeWwLU
-
After watching the video I must say the presenter did produce some decent evidence debunking some of Dimonds claims for some of the tricks. Video started strong-ish then he got a little bit into speculation territory with some ok statements/arguments in the middle which didn't necessarily refute anything but made some good alternating points and then brought up a few good points at the end and then challenged Michael Dimond to a debate on the matter. He does admit there are sorcerors out there but doesn't think the ones he defended on the show that Dimonds attacked are using black magic and he does make some good points to this by showing how many of the tricks are done.
Overall I give the guy a C+ (B- if I'm being generous) for this effort (he's a Novus Ordite though unfortunately) and think the video is worth a view to see the other side.
-
The "Deuterocomical" guy actually did release a video trying to debunk Dimonds magician video. It's about an hour long. I haven't seen it yet but am going to give it a view but I'm guessing he attacks some strawmen or only attacks one or two points and claims victory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdXPoTeWwLU
Good video. It's like debunking Lad's flat earth magic and supposed lying scientists with real physics. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it's fake or false or real magic. It's too easy to be deceived. Look first to rational natural explanations even though you can't think of any.
-
Good video. It's like debunking Lad's flat earth magic and supposed lying scientists with real physics. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it's fake or false or real magic. It's too easy to be deceived. Look first to rational natural explanations even though you can't think of any.
Most of the video is complete garbage, and the fact that you consider it "good" is a sign of your lack of intellectual capacity, and your lack of any deep supernatural faith. There's no "magic" to flat earth either, and you have never refuted the flat earth position with any rational argument. You're nothing but a faithless idiot.
-
Most of the video is complete garbage, and the fact that you consider it "good" is a sign of your lack of intellectual capacity, and your lack of any deep supernatural faith. There's no "magic" to flat earth either, and you have never refuted the flat earth position with any rational argument. You're nothing but a faithless idiot.
It's good as far as it shows that most of the very believable tricks are just clever illusions. It shows how easy it is to be deceived by simple physics and nature. Certainly the video was not as thorough as it should have been, and surely there are some demonic forces at work.
You aren't me, so you can't judge the extent of my faith.
I have refuted some FE "proofs" in the past, then everyone goes quiet until they forget the refutation, then go back to their same old irrefutable "proofs".
-
The "Deuterocomical" guy actually did release a video trying to debunk Dimonds magician video. It's about an hour long. I haven't seen it yet but am going to give it a view but I'm guessing he attacks some strawmen or only attacks one or two points and claims victory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdXPoTeWwLU
Thank you for posting this. This was fantastic. I watched the majority of it, and yes, he answered the video very well. Just because Michael Dimond doesn't know how a trick is done, doesn't mean it was done by the devil.
It is superstitious to assign a supernatural cause to some event without proof. In the absence of proof of a supernatural causation, one must assume the cause is a natural event, even if one doesn't know what the natural cause is. This is the Catholic way of thinking. If Michael Dimond knew anything about the Catholic faith, he would know that.
So, if something good happens to you, you don't assume it happened because of your lucky rabbit's foot. You assume you just got lucky.
-
I personally know a handful of converts that came to Traditionalism (from other faiths) due to the Diamonds. All converts were men.
The Diamonds are a little nutty on some things, and I don't like their constant anathemas of heresy, but...in our overly feminized, wishy-washy, "maybe, sometimes" world, the Diamonds presentation of the Faith as "yes, yes and no, no" speaks to people, mostly men. It works. Can't argue with results.
Finding the Dimond brother's videos actually helped me understand what was up with the church, and thus facilitated my journey into Traditionalism. Though I'm not about to "stay home".
I'm still working out BOD/BOB. I believe that there's no salvation outside the church. I'm also fairly new at this.
-
https://youtu.be/FUv-Q6EgEFI
-
https://youtu.be/FUv-Q6EgEFI
Fake. You can see how he does 90% of the tricks using slow playback. I'm not sure how he got the one in his mouth that he spit out. There could have been some chemistry involved to inflate the ball at will.
-
From 1:27-1:29 :laugh2:
Besides the time stamp I referenced where he looks absolutely retarded some of his other hand movements look bizarre. Is there a natural explanation? I’d say yes. At the same time his body language and hand movements in the video above don’t look entirely like an act, as if it’s all just putting on to add humor to the trick itself.
-
From 1:27-1:29 :laugh2:
Besides the time stamp I referenced where he looks absolutely retarded some of his other hand movements look bizarre. Is there a natural explanation? I’d say yes. At the same time his body language and hand movements in the video above don’t look entirely like an act, as if it’s all just putting on to add humor to the trick itself.
I think the strange behavior is deliberately intended as a distraction, which is key to all sleight-of-hand tricks ... and it's very effective. It's hard to focus on what he's doing rather than his bizarre faces and movements.
-
I think the strange behavior is deliberately intended as a distraction, which is key to all sleight-of-hand tricks ... and it's very effective. It's hard to focus on what he's doing rather than his bizarre faces and movements.
I must say that I didn't even think about it in that way… which makes the most sense to me now that I'm thinking about what you've said.
I don't know if what I'm about to propose has any merit but I was thinking about this earlier today. Is it too much of a reach to say that magic, like in the video above and the others featured in the dimond vid, is a form of psychological warfare? At the very least when it's being performed on a large scale like a Vegas stage show and on television?
I know the proposition isn't anything shocking to consider but I think it's interesting. It makes the observer focus on the “power” of the magician, and even if it can be explained in a natural way like the sleight of hand above it still has the appearance of being preternatural, or “supernatural” to those not aware of the differences between those terms. On the face of it it seems harmless, but as Catholics we know that it isn't harmless. I think what i'm trying to say is that magic performances grease the psyop wheels in the conditioned mind, it is hypnotic to watch and can easily keep someone under a spell. If one takes seriously what these magicians do and has swallowed the lie of it I think those people are the incredulous sheep who quickly dismiss conspiracy. I don't know if I'm making sense. I wish I could articulate my thoughts better.
-
‘I honest to God believe I was drugged’: magician David Copperfield’s alleged victims speak out
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2024/may/15/david-copperfield-allegations
Magician David Copperfield accused of grooming underaged girls, even drugging and raping. He was another one with an island in the Bahamas.
-
‘I honest to God believe I was drugged’: magician David Copperfield’s alleged victims speak out
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2024/may/15/david-copperfield-allegations
Magician David Copperfield accused of grooming underaged girls, even drugging and raping. He was another one with an island in the Bahamas.
Oh, Copperstein was also on the Epstein list.
-
‘I honest to God believe I was drugged’: magician David Copperfield’s alleged victims speak out
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2024/may/15/david-copperfield-allegations
Magician David Copperfield accused of grooming underaged girls, even drugging and raping. He was another one with an island in the Bahamas.
Thank you for sharing this, Mark.
Quote in article from one of the victims: “She says she had nightmares for years about Copperfield using his magic on her.”
The quote really stuck out to me(among many things). All the years of psychological torture she's had to suffer through, being haunted by him… the unrest, and sleepless nights. Meanwhile Copperstein is on his private island continuing to do the devils work without a care in the world. Absolutely disgusting.
-
The main issue with the Dimonds is not that they disagree with this or that point, but rather how they disagree. Their bad will, their bitter zeal, their uncharitable accusations, their demonstration that they are in no way Good Christian Gentlemen like for e.g. St. Francis de Sales and St. Thomas More, but rather radical monks like Luther and others condemned by the Church. Not even the Pope demands as absolute a submission as the Dimonds demand from their disciples, and one can see the sad effects of this cognitive dissonance on those who look up to the Dimonds. The Dimonds basically set themselves up as a Pope or an Anti-Pope and demand submission to each of their opinions.
Personally, I think some magic is just human tricks, while others are indeed diabolical. I consider Exorcisms a better proof of the preternatural and supernatural, and also of the True Faith, since Priests demonstrate authority over demons. I also think NDEs - and the Dimonds did another video on that recently - are a decent proof of the afterlife.
-
The main issue with the Dimonds is not that they disagree with this or that point, but rather how they disagree. Their bad will, their bitter zeal, their uncharitable accusations, their demonstration that they are in no way Good Christian Gentlemen like for e.g. St. Francis de Sales and St. Thomas
Yes, but those who follow them see that they have "softened" quite a bit over the years, and their attitude doesn't undermine the substance of what they're saying.
-
Personally, I think some magic is just human tricks, while others are indeed diabolical.
And the Dimonds would admit this as well, and have. Many/most of the "magicians" in their video admitted to working with some kind of spirits, entities, or in some cases explicitly demons. Some have had lifelong friends say that the were losers who suddenly "discovered" their powers after having had some kind of mystical experience. Close childhood friend of "Dynamo" says that he went out into the woods for some time, after he became desperate to find fame in the wake of a near-death health episode, and somehow communed with some spirits, and returned with these amazing skills which he didn't have before. One guy says that he works with a spirit called "Desmond", and others explicitly named the demons they're working with. Many of them mock Our Lord by trying to replicate His miracles, portraying them as tricks, and the one guy made his name into a mockery of Our Lord and even issued "Scripture" verses according to himself. Several walked on water, others made fish and bread appear out of nowhere, and some adopt these poses of being crucified, and float into the air to mimic/mock Our Lord's Ascension. When people see these things, they are more inclined to write off Our Lord's miracles as "magic" tricks.
-
Ok, that's fair. We do know the preternatural exists, demons and devils and the like. Obviously, those who commune with them, or attempt to do so, are putting their Souls in the gravest peril. Some of those claims could be exaggerated or false, while others could be accurate. My main issue with the Dimonds are their theological errors, like when they claim the entire Catholic Hierarchy could conceivably defect, or other such manifest absurdities, not this particular issue. But, another thread for that.
-
Stumbled onto this and this thread seems a reasonable place to note it: https://expose-news.com/2024/05/21/occultism-child-trafficking-and-harry-houdinis/
In 1912, Sir Doyle found himself deploying trickery to service the “new imperial science” by overseeing an operation that included a Jesuit priest named Pierre Teilhard de Chardin centred in Piltdown, England which professed to “discover” the remains of a proto-human skeleton dubbed “The Piltdown Man.” Proven years later to have been a hoax (fusing a dyed human skull with a monkey jaw and carved teeth), the aim of this operation was to fill in the non-existent missing link in fossil records which had embarrassed Darwinists since Thomas Huxley launched the X Club in 1865.
Interesting connections to Zionists like Bernard Baruch and Lord Balfour.
-
Interesting connections to Zionists like Bernard Baruch and Lord Balfour.
Shocking, I tell ya.
-
Getting back to the thread title, I wasn’t aware magicians are a problem for Catholics or society in general.
I can’t think of any I’ve seen recently, and those I have seen didn’t need to be cracked down upon. A six year old girl in my class’s father performed some magic tricks at her class birthday party. He wasn’t that good but the children loved it when pulled coins out of their ears, did card tricks, produced scarves from his nose…
In the early 1990’s two Indian (East) fellows dressed as magicians boarded the uptown 6 train in NYC, pushing a cart set up as a magic show. They proceeded to entertain us with classic tricks including pulling a real small rabbit out of a top hat! There was piano music to accompany the show. It was really quite good, so they made a fair amount when they went through the car with the donation can. Probably the Transit Police would crack down on them, but none were present. Our show was from 59 & Lex to 125 St.
I don’t get it! Are the Dimonds harassed by demonic magicians? I’ve never been there, but their “monastery” in the woods hardly seems like a place that attracts magicians. Maybe I’m wrong, but don’t they not have TV’s and strictly limit the use of internet?
-
‘I honest to God believe I was drugged’: magician David Copperfield’s alleged victims speak out
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2024/may/15/david-copperfield-allegations
Magician David Copperfield accused of grooming underaged girls, even drugging and raping. He was another one with an island in the Bahamas.
The Bill Cosby of the Top Hat Set.
-
Getting back to the thread title, I wasn’t aware magicians are a problem for Catholics or society in general.
...
I don’t get it! Are the Dimonds harassed by demonic magicians? I’ve never been there, but their “monastery” in the woods hardly seems like a place that attracts magicians. Maybe I’m wrong, but don’t they not have TV’s and strictly limit the use of internet?
Of course it doesn't have anything to do with them personally being harassed. If you watch the video, you'll see what it's about, the subtle effect on popular culture these types are having where they're undermining people's belief in Our Lord. Our Lord's miracles were among the most powerful signs of "credibility" for Our Lord when He came, that which showed everyone that He had the authority of God. But with these magicians "replicating" nearly every miracle Our Lord performed, it makes it easy for the cynics in the world to scoff at Our Lord's having been the Son of God. Pfft. Dynamo, Blane, Copperfield, and Jebreezus (that's what he called himself in blasphemy) did all that and more. Jesus was just a magician as many of His detractors claimed.
When the Brothers put out videos about Orthodoxy, it's not because they're attacked by the Orthodox or somehow tempted to become Orthodox, or when they put out videos about evolution, it's not as though they're tempted to believe in it ... they put these materials out because there are many out there, millions, and billions of souls who are being deceived by these things, and also having their faith weakened by these so-called "magicians".
-
Most of the video is complete garbage, and the fact that you consider it "good" is a sign of your lack of intellectual capacity, and your lack of any deep supernatural faith. There's no "magic" to flat earth either, and you have never refuted the flat earth position with any rational argument. You're nothing but a faithless idiot.
Deuterocomical saw this thread and he said he is willing to have you or anyone who disagrees with his magic video onto his channel to discuss/debate this topic. Email him at deuterocomical2023@gmail.com if you are willing
-
Deuterocomical saw this thread and he said he is willing to have you or anyone who disagrees with his magic video onto his channel to discuss/debate this topic. Email him at deuterocomical2023@gmail.com if you are willing
Sorry, but I don't have time for it. Fact is that most of the attacks come from people who don't believe in the preternatural.
I wasted enough time on a couple of the "debunking" videos. One of them had a guy welding together some apparatus made of steel to simulate the levitation guys ... problem with that being that the levitation guys in the Dimond video clearly have no such apparatus, as they get up, move around, etc. ... and there would be absolutely no way to hide that. One of those guys actually gets rid of his stick when someone tried to claim that his stick was involved. He put his hand on some guy's head and did the same stunt, and at another time he actually let go and had no hands.
Debunking of the Great Wall of China was also absurd nonsense. It involved the magician sneaking into the bottom of a cart that was then wheeled around this "wall" to "stand in for" the Great Wall of China, something in the studio that was about 20 feet in length that you could wheel a cart around. Uhm, the Wall of China is 13,000 miles long and varies between 15 and 32 feet thick, of solid stone. No way anyone was wheeling any kind of cart around it, nor did he dig a tunnel underneath it, and there were spectators on top of the wall for long distances, with cameras running looking down the length of the wall lest he find some way to climb over it, and then just magically re-appear under the sheet on the other side.
So the debunking videos were so ludicrous that they show nothing but bad faith, from individals who refuse to believe in the supernatural world. Whether or not every single element depicted in the Dimond video is true or not we can't be certain about, but very many of them, and likely most of them, do involve preternatural activity. Only someone who does not believe in the spiritual world can pretend otherwise, as they desperately try to rationalize away, and it's not worth my time to debate such a clown. Have him contact the Dimond Brothers for a debate, but they probably don't want to waste their time on some infidel anyway.
-
The Bill Cosby of the Top Hat Set.
So, I missed this post, but Copperstein was on the Epstein list. He was supposed to perform some stunt (announced it months ahead of time) where he'd make the moon disappear, but then a few weeks before it was supposed to happen, his name showed up on a leaked copy of the list. So, some organization called something like "Save the Children" was actually sponsoring this, so no doubt the sponsor had to back away from this one ... although many of those organizations are in fact just fronts for cнιℓd тrαffιcking rings, yet to keep up their public front/image they'd have to back away from Copperstein. Yet, Copperfield is fabulously welathy and could have funded it himself, so maybe it was just trying to keep a low profile til it all blew over, as Americans have very short attention spans.
-
https://www.businessinsider.com/magician-david-copperfield-implicated-jeffrey-epstein-case-trade-tickets-girls-2024-1
So the docs cite him as trading tickets for young girls. Jews just can't help themselves I guess.
"Save the Children" then did just unceremoniously deleted any reference to the Copperstein stunt from their website.
This happened about 6 weeks before he was supposed to make the moon disappear ... where he was undoubtedly plotting to show the moon to some young girls while everyone was distracted with his illusions.
-
Although overcast, there was a moon last night. I guess it’s back to the drawing board! Perhaps a visit to Switzerland is in order?
-
Sorry, but I don't have time for it. Fact is that most of the attacks come from people who don't believe in the preternatural.
I wasted enough time on a couple of the "debunking" videos. One of them had a guy welding together some apparatus made of steel to simulate the levitation guys ... problem with that being that the levitation guys in the Dimond video clearly have no such apparatus, as they get up, move around, etc. ... and there would be absolutely no way to hide that. One of those guys actually gets rid of his stick when someone tried to claim that his stick was involved. He put his hand on some guy's head and did the same stunt, and at another time he actually let go and had no hands.
Debunking of the Great Wall of China was also absurd nonsense. It involved the magician sneaking into the bottom of a cart that was then wheeled around this "wall" to "stand in for" the Great Wall of China, something in the studio that was about 20 feet in length that you could wheel a cart around. Uhm, the Wall of China is 13,000 miles long and varies between 15 and 32 feet thick, of solid stone. No way anyone was wheeling any kind of cart around it, nor did he dig a tunnel underneath it, and there were spectators on top of the wall for long distances, with cameras running looking down the length of the wall lest he find some way to climb over it, and then just magically re-appear under the sheet on the other side.
So the debunking videos were so ludicrous that they show nothing but bad faith, from individals who refuse to believe in the supernatural world. Whether or not every single element depicted in the Dimond video is true or not we can't be certain about, but very many of them, and likely most of them, do involve preternatural activity. Only someone who does not believe in the spiritual world can pretend otherwise, as they desperately try to rationalize away, and it's not worth my time to debate such a clown. Have him contact the Dimond Brothers for a debate, but they probably don't want to waste their time on some infidel anyway.
You can't even spare an hour to discuss it with him? I find that hard to believe given since you have enough free time to spend on the internet and reply to me so quickly. But hey, I can't force you to, I just thought maybe you would step up since the Dimond's are obviously too scared to debate him (he's challenged them multiple times).
I also suspect that you didn't actually watch his full response, because he clearly stated that he does believe in the preternatural/supernatural, so I'm not really sure what you're talking about. He also clearly explained how Special Head (the levitating street performer) levitates and even addresses the video of him floating without the stick that you mentioned. Have you wondered why he needs a human to stand right where his stick normally would be in order for it to work? If he was literally and actually floating, he would do it without a spectator and without a stick. Why does he need to touch someone's head? It's clearly using their body to hide the mechanism (as explained in the video).
And regarding the Great Wall trick, there are several explanations (such as the use of a helicopter to lift him over the wall). But the better question to ask yourself is, why did the assistants wheel away the steps away? What was their reason for doing that if he wasn't hiding in there?
I would just ask you to reflect on the possibility that all of the following statements can be simultaneously true without contradiction:
1. The preternatural/supernatural world is real
2. Magicians are very good at trickery, and every (or nearly every) trick in their "docuмentary" has an explanation
3. Many magicians cause scandal by association with occult themes
4. It is calumny for the Dimonds to broadly accuse every magician in their video of being empowered by demons when many of the tricks were shown to be simple explanations (why haven't the Dimond's apologized to the Chinese face changer? They remove them from the newer versions of the video, but never apologized or admitted they were wrong)
5. It's possible that were merely fooled by clever entertainers, and have again been fooled by clever Benedictine cosplayers
I hope you change your mind and debate Deuterocomical, because he has gone unchallenged and appears to be the clear victor right now.
-
You can't even spare an hour to discuss it with him? I find that hard to believe given since you have enough free time to spend on the internet and reply to me so quickly.
No more time than I have already spent on it. I'm not going to spend hours trying to debunk every debuking attempt, as it's just not worth my time. As for the time I spend on the internet, I work two jobs, 12 hours a day, 6.5 days per week, and the only way I survive is by taking a mental break every 20-30 minutes on average, looking at some threads, and typing quick responses. I type very quickly so that I get comments from everyone, including colleagues from work. I was starting to write some articles for Substack, but just can't find the time to finish them, because they require much more polish than making random posts on CI here that just roll off the top of my fingers, and I just type what I think. Having debunked a couple of his examples suffices for me to know that he has some agenda and isn't being honest, and I for one know that much of this magic is performed due to diabolical agency, nor am I on some crusade of vitriolic contempt for the Dimond Brothers where I would spent the time just to attack them out of contempt. So I have no motivation to spend this kind of time on it. If I had extra time, I'd return to finishing up the Substack articles I started months ago. You can see on my Member stats that I average roughly 8 posts per day, and if I had to guess, these average maybe 5 minutes per post on the high side. Some are a bit longer, but others are very brief. And, as I said, I type very quickly, without any polish or refinement, and not spending much time on it.
-
In other words, what would be my motivation?
-- to attack the Dimonds (I don't have any ill will toward them)
-- to defend every word of their videos (I'm not a cult follower of them either)
-- to prove that many magic tricks are performed by cooperation with demons? I already know this.
-- to prove that EVERY trick in their (4-hour) video is? Don't feel the need to do that (see the above).
I've done just enough to expose that there's a bad will and agenda behind this latest attack on the Dimonds, whether out of personal animosity,our on account of Rationalism and lack of faith (not believing in the spiritual / preternatural world), and those two examples I went through (and wasted 10-15 minutes of my time each) suffice for that purpose.
I saw the guy building the metal structure for levitation (couldn't have happened) and the guy attempting to reproduce the Great Wall of China trick (epic fail due to the conditions I explained). Both are obvious and transparent fails and could only be accepted as evidence by someone applying confirmation bias and begging the question, for some agenda.
Now, I can't 100% rule out camera tricks, since you can do almost anything with that and video editing software and AI, but many of these appeared to have been performed in front of live audiences.
-
BTW, I went to go look at the debunking videos with an open mind, since I have no motivation or compulsion to prove that even 1% of the things in their videos are legit (see the lack of motivation post).
-
To the point about "invincible ignorance" mentioned near the beginning of this thread:
(https://i.imgur.com/EuNOjhp.png)
-
You can't even spare an hour to discuss it with him? [...]
Children of God are instructed not to converse with demons nor to cast pearls before swine.
-
No more time than I have already spent on it. I'm not going to spend hours trying to debunk every debuking attempt, as it's just not worth my time. As for the time I spend on the internet, I work two jobs, 12 hours a day, 6.5 days per week, and the only way I survive is by taking a mental break every 20-30 minutes on average, looking at some threads, and typing quick responses. I type very quickly so that I get comments from everyone, including colleagues from work. I was starting to write some articles for Substack, but just can't find the time to finish them, because they require much more polish than making random posts on CI here that just roll off the top of my fingers, and I just type what I think. Having debunked a couple of his examples suffices for me to know that he has some agenda and isn't being honest, and I for one know that much of this magic is performed due to diabolical agency, nor am I on some crusade of vitriolic contempt for the Dimond Brothers where I would spent the time just to attack them out of contempt. So I have no motivation to spend this kind of time on it. If I had extra time, I'd return to finishing up the Substack articles I started months ago. You can see on my Member stats that I average roughly 8 posts per day, and if I had to guess, these average maybe 5 minutes per post on the high side. Some are a bit longer, but others are very brief. And, as I said, I type very quickly, without any polish or refinement, and not spending much time on it.
Wait, when did you "debunk a couple of his examples"? Your question of "how did Copperfield get to the other side of the wall" is just that: a question. If you think mere questions are "debunking" then I don't know what to tell you (especially when I gave an answer to it). Same thing for Special Head.
You also claim to "know that much of this magic is performed due to diabolical agency". If you have even a shred of evidence for this, I'm all ears. But "I don't know how it's done, therefore demons" isn't very convincing to any reasonable person.
I would at least have some respect if you said something like "yeah the Dimond's were quick to condemn some people were just doing mere tricks, and they need to retract those accusations and apologize" but you aren't even willing to do that for some reason.
-
In other words, what would be my motivation?
-- to attack the Dimonds (I don't have any ill will toward them)
-- to defend every word of their videos (I'm not a cult follower of them either)
-- to prove that many magic tricks are performed by cooperation with demons? I already know this.
-- to prove that EVERY trick in their (4-hour) video is? Don't feel the need to do that (see the above).
I've done just enough to expose that there's a bad will and agenda behind this latest attack on the Dimonds, whether out of personal animosity,our on account of Rationalism and lack of faith (not believing in the spiritual / preternatural world), and those two examples I went through (and wasted 10-15 minutes of my time each) suffice for that purpose.
I saw the guy building the metal structure for levitation (couldn't have happened) and the guy attempting to reproduce the Great Wall of China trick (epic fail due to the conditions I explained). Both are obvious and transparent fails and could only be accepted as evidence by someone applying confirmation bias and begging the question, for some agenda.
Now, I can't 100% rule out camera tricks, since you can do almost anything with that and video editing software and AI, but many of these appeared to have been performed in front of live audiences.
You don't have to attack the Dimonds, just simply admitting that they were wrong to accuse far too many people. Are you willing to do that
Can you give one, just one example of a trick that you believe is done by the cooperation of demons? Remember simply saying "I don't know how this trick is done, therefore demons" won't cut it. Your examples so far of David Copperfield and Special Head are simply examples of you not understanding the method.
You are still stuck on the "you must not believe in the supernatural". It's hard to believe you aren't a Dimond cult follower when all you do is regurgitate their failed talking points.
Be honest, did you watch the Deuterocomical video, specifically the part where he explains the levitations? It's fine if you didn't because ignorance is preferable to dishonestly, but I would recommend you do.
Also, the pure irony of you bringing up confirmation bias is amazing. The DImonds original video was just 4 hours of confirmation bias.
I'm glad that you are willing to admit that camera tricks are a possibility (something that Dimonds refuse to accept for some reason), so why is that unbelievable to you? Why is having an audience that is in on the trick so unbelievable for you? It happens all the time.
-
Children of God are instructed not to converse with demons nor to cast pearls before swine.
We're not supposed to talk to non-Catholics? Huh?
-
Debunking of the Great Wall of China was also absurd nonsense. It involved the magician sneaking into the bottom of a cart that was then wheeled around this "wall" to "stand in for" the Great Wall of China, something in the studio that was about 20 feet in length that you could wheel a cart around. Uhm, the Wall of China is 13,000 miles long and varies between 15 and 32 feet thick, of solid stone. No way anyone was wheeling any kind of cart around it, nor did he dig a tunnel underneath it, and there were spectators on top of the wall for long distances, with cameras running looking down the length of the wall lest he find some way to climb over it, and then just magically re-appear under the sheet on the other side.
(https://i.imgur.com/Bksh5gV.jpeg)(https://i.imgur.com/5bXic78.png)
-
one guy built a metal apparatus to simulate the street levitation … but there’s clearly no apparatus involved in the actual tricks shown, as they move locations, without any sign of an apparatus
What do you mean by "clearly no apparatus involved" when the guy is always wearing baggy clothing and either has a rug or sand beneath him (not to mention, a big stick)? Are you saying because you can't see it, it isn't there?
Also when you say "move locations" you mean that he can walk away after the trick is done, right? He never walks away from the rug and does the trick again somewhere else, conveniently, so this still just means that the apparatus is detachable as proven in the video.
-
We're not supposed to talk to non-Catholics? Huh?
A Catholic talking to a demon is like an innocent person talking to a cop who questions him about a suspected crime or anything innocuous he is doing. The Catholic (like the innocent citizen) has absolutely nothing to gain from talking but everything to lose.
-
A Catholic talking to a demon is like an innocent person talking to a cop who questions him about a suspected crime or anything innocuous he is doing. The Catholic (like the innocent citizen) has absolutely nothing to gain from talking but everything to lose.
Oh, you're mean talking to demons. Yeah I agree we shouldn't do that.
I was saying he should talk to Deuterocomical (unless you are implying that he is somehow a demon???)