Happy Atheist Forum

I'm sure many of u are familiar with the "miracle" of the Holy Fire (or Holy Light) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Fire which occurs every year, on the day before Easter day, at the Church of the Resurrection (Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem). I first I learned about it a couple of years ago, when I watched a video captured inside the church, but I didn't really give it much attention. The reason why I'm bringing this up now is because yesterday I was debating some friends in religion and they gave this miracle as a proof for the existence of the supernatural. Since I didn't know much about it, I couldn't respond to their questions; I told them, however, that I will do some research and then get back to them.
I tried to google it but I couldn't find any solid information on this event. I thought I'd ask you guys about it.I started this topic, hoping to get some interesting replies on the subject. Maybe you'll have a better luck finding something online or maybe someone has already researched it. And even if, this matter hasn't actually been tackled strongly by skeptics and no real data is available on the net, it would be interesting to try and bring it down ourselves.. Finally, there are many videos on YouTube which you can watch to learn more about it. Just put "Holy Fire" in your search..

Holy fire miracle. Hoax? Yes.

[/thread]

In all seriousness, what makes it special above and beyond other miracles? Why would this one in particular provide proof while others don't? Maybe because it's easier to fake so easier to provide "proof" for. Who knows.

It's not a question of whether it is a hoax or not. I know it is!
The reason I'm interested in it is because it is repeated every year. It's not just a "miracle" that occurred once. I'm interested to read about how they manage to recreate this fraud every single year, in front of thousands. I know the gullible are easy to fool but that doesn't make it any easier to pull, especially since they broadcast it live on TV every Easter.

Some candles light by themselves?  That's a miracle?  I once saw David Copperfield make the Statue of Liberty disappear - I think that beats self lighting candles.

I would call bullshit to accept this as supernatural - has there been any controlled investigation of this miracle outside of the Vatican "miracle inspectors"?  I bet not.  To be supernatural there can be no naturalistic explanation for the event at all leaving only a supernatural one.

One naked guy alone in a room, no cameras allowed in the room, no witnesses allowed in the room....... No proof of a miracle in my book.

I am afraid your religious friends have got one over on you here. If you don't know about this miracle, then it is up to them to present you with the evidence for it's supernatural power, not for you to go away and research it.

Having said that, lighting candles is not really that special, I wonder if they would let Randi watch him in the chamber?

Quote from: "SSY"If you don't know about this miracle, then it is up to them to present you with the evidence for it's supernatural power, not for you to go away and research it

It's not even about who has to prove what as I see it. A miracle would be an event that could not be explained by (insert any plausible explanation, including hoaxes, here). Since this one obviously can, it's not a miracle.

For example, an asteroid on a collision course with Earth that stops and reverses just before entering the atmosphere would be a miracle. No placebo effect or other psych factors involved, hard to fake and defying the laws of physics.

Quote from: "SSY"I am afraid your religious friends have got one over on you here. If you don't know about this miracle, then it is up to them to present you with the evidence for it's supernatural power, not for you to go away and research it.

You're right about them needing to present the evidence but since they couldn't, I wanted to research it myself because I got curious.

[/quote]Having said that, lighting candles is not really that special, I wonder if they would let Randi watch him in the chamber?[/quote]

In fact, I was hoping to find something by Randi on the subject. And since I couldn't find anything worth noting, I brought it up here.

Finally, it's not HOW he lights up the first inside the chamber that interests me(there are a gazillion ways he can do it) it's the idea of the fire not burning the skin of the witnesses even though they brought the candles themselves.

If you look close at the hands passing through the flame (at least in the video's I've seen), they aren't holding them there for long.  I can do that with a candle!  In fact I've done that many many times, and still have all my fingers intact, no burns or anything.  That doesn't make it a miracle, just good timing.  Now if I were to stick my hand in a kiln/dryer burner or a torch flame for a split second, that would be a problem, little bit more energy behind that fire.   If they want to prove it doesn't hurt let them leave their hand in the flame longer than a second or two, say a minute or more.  Preferably lots more.

Quote from: "KDbeads"If you look close at the hands passing through the flame (at least in the video's I've seen), they aren't holding them there for long.  I can do that with a candle!  In fact I've done that many many times, and still have all my fingers intact, no burns or anything.  That doesn't make it a miracle, just good timing.  Now if I were to stick my hand in a kiln/dryer burner or a torch flame for a split second, that would be a problem, little bit more energy behind that fire.   If they want to prove it doesn't hurt let them leave their hand in the flame longer than a second or two, say a minute or more.  Preferably lots more.

I would add that along with not hurting, it also doesn't cause damage after a minute or two.

It would be an easy question to frame as well

"Hey, the longer you hold your hand in the flame, the more you show your belief in God! Let's see who believes in Him the most? If you really had faith, you would be able to hold your hand in there for 60 seconds easily"

Quote from: "SSY"It would be an easy question to frame as well

"Hey, the longer you hold your hand in the flame, the more you show your belief in God! Let's see who believes in Him the most? If you really had faith, you would be able to hold your hand in there for 60 seconds easily"

I'd take that bet, I can hold my hand there indefinitely which would show that I believe more.

So after looking around a bit, i would bring up 3 interesting points.
1. Could there be someone inside the holy of holies with matches, or a pair of flints and some holy oil soaked rug.
2. The fire is only produced AFTER the old man and his friends go into the holy of holies, and only AFTER a while.
3. The fire is never present without anyone in the holy of holies , it is only present after the old man and his friends go in.

http://vimeo.com/10152052 (http://vimeo.com/10152052)
 observe the vid, there is plenty of time between entry to the holy of holies and the exit with fire to even use a flint to strike a fire, ppl where taking photos with flash during this period :-) I bet he would get you the bones on that one.
http://skeptoid.com/about.php (http://skeptoid.com/about.php)
and yes he is on twitter , find him
http://skeptoid.com/episode.php?id=4012-1&comments=all (http://skeptoid.com/episode.php?id=4012-1&comments=all)

After watching the video, I have to say that I can't understand how adult human beings believe this. Reading the translation of the interview between the "reporter" and the priest is just mind-boggling.

I would bet money that the least talented local magician could do this and make it more believable.

Just....wow...what a load of crap.