Saturday, July 12, 2008

Holy Crap! Or Myrna Nazzour - the Miracle Faker of Damascus



Take a look at the objects below. The first is the Holy Lance that is kept in the Schatzkammer of Vienna. Allegedly, this is the spear that was used to pierce Jesus on the cross. There are of course other relics like it and we don't even know for certain that the story of the crucifixion - or Jesus for that matter - is anything more than religious myth. But for our purpose, it is sufficient that if the incident took place at the time suggested, and if Jesus was pierced by a Roman spearhead, it would a have been roughly similar to the one below in shape.



What kind of wound would such a spear produce? What would a wound from a Roman spear look like? Painters and other artists have imagined and depicted it for centuries and if you google for "stab wound" or "knife wound", perhaps you can get a general idea. Now, would it look like on the picture below?





As you can see, this is not a cut and it is not an open wound. The shape of this wound to the side of the chest is irregular so it has not been produced by a blade pushed into the body and then pulled out. And even if the blade had been turned and twisted during the penetration, it would have produced a wound with totally different irregularities - and something of a mess. In addition, alongside the wound in the picture, there is coloring of the skin suggesting that it has been scratched rather than pierced. I think it is fair to say that a) this wound is not caused by a Roman spear and b) this wound is not what you would imagine that such a wound would look like. Why these two alternatives are equally important, I will explain later on.

The next object is a replica of a Roman nail as they were designed during the time of Jesus. It is fairly safe to say that nails had to be quite large and look something like this to hold a body in place on a cross. And it is a fact that crucifixions were Roman practice at the time.



We don't really know if it was the palm of the hand or the wrist that was spiked, or if the feet were penetrated on the instep or through the heel. Some suggest that the arms were tied to the cross with ropes. Regardless of which, you should be able to imagine what kind of wound a Roman nail would cause. And keep in mind that the nails were not withdrawn right after the penetration, but stayed in place for at least one or a couple of days. Now, is it probable that the wounds pictured below were caused by Roman nails?








If you saw these wounds out of context, would you suggest they were caused by a thick nail having been pierced through the limbs? Of course not. They are similar in type to the chest wound, only shorter. It is likely that these palm and instep wounds derive from the same source and it is fair to say that a) these wounds are not caused by Roman nails and b) these wounds are not what you would imagine that such wounds would look like.

Jesus is said to have been wearing a crown of thorn. The image below is just a costume replica and it is of course impossible to know exactly what such a headgear would have looked like but we do know thorn and it could have looked something like this. We can be certain that it would have had lots of thorns, since crucifixion and everything pertaining to it was intended to cause as much pain as possible, for as long time as possible.




Would a crown of thorn produce wounds like on the picture below?





This time, it's hard to tell because of the blood. But if you look carefully you see that just above where the blood seems to spring from, there is a scratch or irritation of the skin close to the wound. You can also see that there is only one wound, perhaps with the other, upper scratch being a failed attempt. But there are no other wounds around the head, just the one at the center of the forehead. So this stigmata corresponds with a crown of thorn with only one thorn. It is fair to say that a) this wound is not caused by a crown of thorn and b) this wound is not what you would imagine that such wounds would look like.

All the objects above are essential to the myth of the crucifixion of Jesus, and to the phenomena of stigmata, the appearance of bodily wounds, or sensing of pain, in locations corresponding to the wounds of Jesus on the cross. Apart from nail wounds to the palms and feet, a spear wound to the chest area or abdomen, and marks from the crown, stigmatics may also show wounds to the shoulders from carrying the cross or sweating or crying blood. The phenomena is regarded as a sign from God and stigmatic persons tend to be canonized by religious believers and sometimes even by the church - such a miracle is of course only displayed by someone who is pure in heart and faith.

There are three major suggested explanations for the phenomena of stigmata:

1. Wounds or other signs are produced by a suggested supreme being.

2. Wounds or other signs are produced through self-suggestion, i.e. the "victim" inflicts the wounds him- or herself by power of suggestion. The stigmatic has such a strong faith that it effects the physiology.

3. Wounds or other signs are faked.

In our case, the first option must be considered totally out of the question. If a supreme being would have the power to inflict wounds, it would surely not restrain itself to scratches -- we would see wounds that actually resemble what wounds would look like if they were caused by the objects suggested. In our case, they don't. Not by a long shot.

There is scientific evidence that lends support to the second option. There are studies suggesting that dermatological changes can occur as a result of suggestion (Spanos & Chaves, 1989). However, not in any case have such changes been in the form of scratches. Blisters, warts, hemorrhages, or burns may appear, but never scratches.

So none of the wounds above look like what might be expected if they were inflicted by a supreme being, or what might be expected if our imagination was aided by strong suggestion and the skin subject to change in accordance.

That leaves us with the third option: fake.

Myrna Nazzour of Damascus, Syriah, is stigmatic. The wounds you have seen so far are all pictures of Myrna. She is a fake. All her wounds appear when she is hiding under a blanket. Although there are a lot of footage of her, not one sequence shows a wound actually appearing. Myrna's case is similar to that of Therese Neumann, another stigmata faker (Spanos & Chaves, 1989).

In fairness, Myrna's wounds do derive from Jesus, just not in the way they are supposed to. Under the blanket, Myrna uses her crucifix pendant to produce the wounds. That is why she needs a blanket and that is why she keeps twisting and turning under it. That is why the wounds look like they have been caused by an object with features like those of a crucifix pendant.

Crucifix pendants are designed to hang from necklaces. They come in different sizes and models but the three pictured below are fairly common.





These pendants each have at least four points that would produce wounds such as Myrna's. There are the ends of the cross itself and then there is the attachment to the necklace. The ends of the cross can very easily be sharpened without making it visibly obvious. As you can see on the following pictures, Myrna wears her pendant at every time the wounds appear under the blanket. (Feel free to browse the internet for more pictures and footage.)









If the pendant doesn't show, it is concealed under Myrna's clothes. This is evident when you watch the following movie clip:

[Movie clip: watch closely from about 03:35 into the film] (opens in new window)

What you see in this clip is how a hand removes the crucifix pendant to make the wound visible. This tells us two things: if the necklace and pendant doesn't show, it is concealed under Myrna's clothes, and the necklace is of such length that it is more than possible for Myrna to produce wounds below her breasts.

This movie is the third part of a Swedish TV3 documentary, Reportage, televised 16 September 2004. Along with the TV-team, there was a team of Nordic scientists present at Easter that year, monitoring Myrna and the event. The research team was headed by Norwegian cardiothoracic surgeon Knut Kvernebo. No wounds appeared when the researchers were present, but when they all went shopping on the last day, a wound of course appeared. What a proud moment for the scientific community when research is conducted in this way. And what a proud moment for the Swedish skeptics, the VoF, when their chairman at the time, Dan Larhammar, suggests in an interview that the wounds may be caused by bacteria or blood vessels starting to bleed spontaneosly. Larhammar illustrates perfectly the fallacy of misplaced rationalism as described by Sheaffer in the July/August issue of Skeptical Inquirer:

"Before suggesting such a bizarre and complex yet still ultimately rational explanation, it would be more rational to inquire whether there is really any mystery in need of explaining." (Sheaffer, 2008)

In the case of Myrna Nazzour, there is no mystery - she is using jewelry to scratch her skin. It is obvious to anyone that cares to look. There is no need for far-fetched explanations. Skeptics that are afraid to state that fakers are fakers should not comment on fakers.

The simple and obvious explanation for Myrna Nazzour's alleged stigmata is this:





And should Myrna be deprived of her jewelry, and if her nails were checked properly, no wounds would appear. That such precautions are not taken by a research team is an outrage. The scientist's "testimonies" that they have "no explanation" for the wounds displayed by Myrna are now flaunted all over the internet in support for "miracles" that are nothing but fraud. Knut Kvernebo has prostituted science for the benefit of superstition. Hallelujah...


Swedish TV3 documentary: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3.

Sheaffer, R., (2008). The Fallacy of Misplaced Rationalism in Skeptical Inquirer, 32, (4).

Spanos, N. P., & Chaves, J. F., (1989). Hypnosis. The Cognitive-Behavioral Perspective. New York: Prometheus.

48 comments:

  1. Also check out the source-critical value of the texts that describe the torture and killing of Jesus of Nazareth. The gospels are not contemporary with the events they describe and it is uncertain whether any one of them was written by a contemporary of the man. Stigmatics are following a textual blueprint that may very well be fiction.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I never cease to wonder how people can spend so much time analyzing mythology. These "stigmatics" surface regularly, and get the attention of the gutter press so that the ignorant can be titillated. It's hard to believe that people who can add, subtract, and walk straight, waste their intellects on such nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dear Garvarn,

    I completely share your skepticism towards Myrna and other religious fanatics or cynics that generate media hype around trivial fakes and frauds like stigmata that appear on demand (but when nobody is watching), weeping madonnas, etc.

    However, I must point out that you cite me incorrectly in your blog. You wrote: "And what a proud moment for the Swedish skeptics, the VoF, when their chairman at the time, Dan Larhammar, suggests in an interview that the wounds may be caused by bacteria or blood vessels starting to bleed spontaneosly. Larhammar illustrates perfectly the fallacy of misplaced rationalism…"

    In fact, my comment in the documentary concerned the appearance of wounds in general, not "the" wounds displayed by Myrna. When I was interviewed on 29 April, 2004 (the program was aired on 16 Sept), I was shown some glimpses of the recordings that the TV team had made in Damascus. I made some general remarks on the appearance of bleeding wounds for which people may have no obvious external or physical explanation. I did not comment specifically on Myrna because I did not have enough information (the TV team's recordings were clearly inadequate for scientific evaluation of what might have taken place).

    This is what I say in the latter half of part 2 of the documentary: "Yes, it happens that people have wounds that won't heal due to infections or immune deficiencies, and those wounds never heal but are always present. It doesn't seem totally unlikely that wounds [may] appear due to parasites or maybe bacterial infestation like in pustules and the like. Pustules may appear due to infections. And of course it is also conceivable that wounds may appear when blood vessels begin to bleed more or less spontaneously."

    In other words, I listed a number of possible theoretical explanations that should be considered before invoking supernatural explanations for claims of stigmata, and it is obvious that I speak about this in general, because I say "people" and do not related specifically to Myrna. This of course concerned bleeding that may be interpreted post hoc as divine by religious fanatics. This did not concern the type of stigmata that appear on demand.

    I also made the following remark in the documentary: "Researchers may sometimes be a bit gullible when it concerns people who cheat".

    Maybe it was naïve of me to agree to be interviewed, but on the other hand somebody must participate on such a documentary who can express skepticism.

    One of the points that I usually make when I lecture on pseudoscience is that it is unnecessary to come up with explanations when there is nothing that needs to be explained (beyond fakes and fraud). Myrna seems to be such a case.

    Dan Larhammar
    Professor of Molecular Cell Biology
    Department of Neuroscience, Uppsala University

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dear Dan,

    Thank you for commenting. You are of course right, and wrong. I used your general statements as specific for Mrs Nazzour quite intentionally, because your appearance on that documentary is now being used by Nazzour's followers to illustrate how far out science is in explaining the miracles in Damascus specifically (see for instance http://www.tidenstecken.se/myrna.htm). In addition, I don't think that the case of Nazzour needs a scientific explanation at all - you only need one eye to see what she's up to. So a correct statement from a skeptical viewpoint, in my opinion, would have been something in line with "From what I know about cases like these, Nazzour's wounds are self-inflicted." That is true, it is something that the viewers can find reasonable and relate to, and it does not in any way make science or skepticism look ridiculous.

    But we probably don't agree on what a skeptic movement should and should not do, so again, thank you for commenting and I am sorry if I used or abused your participation in this documentary.

    Best regards,
    Garvarn

    ReplyDelete
  5. Scientists and skeptics who are asked to comment on remarkable claims have two options: either one can decline, thereby risking that the extraordinary claims by religious or pseudoscientific fanatics will stand unopposed, or one can try to provide rational explanations, risking that one's comments may be used inappropriately.

    When I am interviewed for printed media, I prefer to respond in print to avoid misunderstandings. Regardless whether the interview is made written or spoken, I request to see the text before it goes to the printer. Journalists are usually agree to this. When interviewed for radio I prefer to participate live to avoid inappropriate cutting and mixing by producers.

    Television interviews are more difficult to handle because they are more often pre-recorded and my experience is that it is hardly ever possible to get a chance to watch the final cut version before it is aired - I have traid but so far in vain.

    Myrna's claimed stigmata was recorded by a TV3 team in the spring of 2004 and I was interviewed a few weeks later. I was shown a few minutes of the recordings and was then interviewed for half an hour or more on various explanations for stigmata (including fraud) and neurotheology in general. From this half-hour discussion only 40 seconds on the origin of stigmata were included in the documentary, and unfortunately it may give a careless viewer the impression that I was commenting specifically on Myrna's case although I was not.

    After I was interviewed, the person who interviewed me revealed more about the circumstances of their recording and I got the impression that he was just as skeptical as me. I was therefore confident that TV3 would dare to make the documentary more skeptical and critical than it actually became. Unfortunately they needed to drag out the story to a one-hour program. In order to make the viewers stay they apparently felt they had to try to make it exciting by witholding much of the critique until the latter part of the program. They also included comments by a non-expert TV celebrity, Paolo Roberto, whose remarks strived to keep an open door regarding the preposterous Myrna event.

    It isn't easy to increase public understanding of science and scientific methods. My opinion is that scientists and skeptics should try, within reasonable limits, to spread such information. There is always a chance that the comments one provides will be used inappropriately. But also information published in scientific journals is misinterpreted by religious fanatics, for example proponents of intelligent design.

    Fortunately, the program about Myrna also included a longer clip from my interview, longer than the one above, where I explain how the brain may misinterpret events and I also provided some likely causes for this. In this context the Swedish skeptic organization is mentioned.

    Unfortunately the program about Myrna was more of a mystery drama than a documentary. I am sure the TV team that vitnessed the (non)event on site and made the recording are not very pleased with the way it was presented by TV3.

    All of us who work actively to increase public understanding of science, and to counteract superstition and religious fanaticism, should certainly be prepared to take critique from fellow skeptics and scientists and others. Constructive criticism is particularly welcome. Unfortunately we do not get many opportunities to direct TV documentaries ourselves.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thank you, Dan. I'm preparing a blog called "Good Skeptic/Bad Skeptic?", in which I will discuss, not your participation in this TV3 documentary, but skeptics in media in general. I will notify you when it is published. Perhaps it will clarify my opinion. Again, thanks.

    Best regards,
    Garvarn

    ReplyDelete
  7. Garvarn, you faith healer! Learn the distinction between a blog and a blog entry! Or I will send negative vibrations!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Jesus, Martin! I'm new at this... From now on, it's "blog entry." But "faith healer" is a bit below the belt, isn't it? Although I do seem to get more attention than I deserve...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Some people say that you are Sanna Ehdin writing under a pseudonym. I'm reading everything closely to catch your slip-ups, Sanna.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Martin, I was called Satan in an e-mail last week. Not bad for an amateur loud-mouth...

    ReplyDelete
  11. Don't get a big head. That was probably just a dyslexic trying to spell S-A-N-N-A.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Ah, that must of course be the rational explanation... Or S-A-N-T-A, perhaps. Anyway, as much as I appreciate your insights, Martin, I have to prepare my next B-L-O-G E-N-T-R-Y. And adjust my bra. Bye for now.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Then again, "Sanna" could be a nickname for "Susan", which Garvarn says his name is not. Of course, Garvarn wouldn't tell his real name, so maybe you're on to somthing there.

    I for one think Garvarn's true identity is Kjell Asplund, which was revealed to me in an dream.

    The plot thickens..

    ReplyDelete
  14. Very interesting post! And I like the blogs new clothes as well!

    ReplyDelete
  15. So, these wounds are not obviously caused by supernational repetition of a historic event, byt they may be miraculous still. The main issue is if these lesions occur spontaneously, that is inexplicably, or if they are surreptitiously self-inflicted in a natural way. In the former case some strange psychological mechanism is to be expected.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The lesions do not occur inexplicably and have never been witnessed to occur spontaneously. They always appear when Nazzour is hiding under a blanket. The psychological mechanism in question is deception. There is nothing miraculous about it and Nazzour knows exactly what she is doing. She's a fraud.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Certainly, a natural account about how a specific wound on Myrna in this circumstance is possible. It is a wound after all, and we have great amount of experience with wounds and the various ways in which they are made. However, to substantiate the faker claim requires more than this; it requires having evidence for faking. Such evidence is lacking.

    As to your analysis regarding a lack of correspondence between tools of the period and their corresponding marks, I suppose that several reason can be given for their lack of correspondence, including many that you could come up with yourself.

    Finally, there are sure so many incidences of unexplainable events that occur that require you to have stronger evidence to call out poor Myrna as a faker based on the analysis that you give.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Garvarn:

    Are you able to explain the OLIVE OIL which runs from the ICON and Myrna's hands, face and body, and the miracles associated with it. I noticed that you neglected to mention these in your remarks. There are many witnesses present when this occurs.

    WTC

    ReplyDelete
  19. Sure, WTC. Give me a reference to images of the "miracle" in question, and I'll do my best. Although I do find it amusing that you cannot think of perfectly rational explanations yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I am the Department Head of Microbiology at a medium-size clinical laboratory in the heart of Toronto. I have witnessed with my own eyes the exudation of oil from Myrna Nazzour's hands (This happened at the end of the liturgy in our church during her visit to Toronto). This phenomenon occured often, even in the presence of church authorities (patriarchs, bishops, Vatican representatives [Apostolic Nuncios], etc.). Myrna's various phenomena (oil exudation, stigmata, cures, etc.) cannot be simply dismissed as fake on the basis of the explanations you provided. Taken together, the data to date point more closely to an inexplicable supernatural source.

    Shaker Farhat
    Toronto, Canada
    July 25, 2009

    ReplyDelete
  21. We cannot say She is a faker, I think no one can not say exactly how Christ was crucified either. In the end, the stigmata are only small wounds that look like the wounds on the crucified body of Christ. If the stigmata were in truth exactly reproduction of those on Christ, Myrna must have been dead by now.
    What is happening to Myrna, are just "signs" sent by God. Some may believe and some others may not.

    ReplyDelete
  22. you are the deciever (writer) of this blog as the age is ending for the manimal .i wouldent want to be in your shoes as you will soon see gods rath is upon the world as i write this...

    ReplyDelete
  23. A scientist (Mathematics, Computer Science, Quantum Physics, and Molecular Biology), I am ashamed to be associated with such a blatant ideological disregard for facts pretending to be "scientific".
    The autenticity of the "Miracle of Damascus" has been demonstrated on many occasions, including the one of which I have been a witness. Read for example the article of Ms Brigid Keenan, the avowed sceptic, in the British newspaper The Independent, the avowed sceptic too:
    http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/myrna-and-the-oil-an-everyday-miracle-how-does-a-woman-become-a-modern-saint-in-damascus-brigid-keenan-met-myrna-nazzour-and-saw-for-herself-1382838.html

    By the way, even without entering into the initiated by you quarrel about the authenticity of Myrna's wounds, it's absolutely simplistic to demand that they should confirm to the archeological artifacts you display.

    Yours sincerely,

    Dr. Edward Belaga
    University of Strasbourg, France

    ReplyDelete
  24. This blogger has only talked about a part of the phenomena.what about disappearance of the wounds soon after the ecstasy? what about her body temperature dropping spontaneously to ice cold? breathlessness? You can address each individual phenomena seperately with some scientific explanation. But what are the odds of a woman doing all the tricks all at once?If she is faking,simultaneously she needs to hurt herself at 6 places of her body, at the same time do some trick to make her body temperature fall to ice cold,and also make many pounds oil to sweat out from her skin.And also hold the breath!! c'mmon!!

    ReplyDelete
  25. Someone like you who is totally Godless has NO RIGHT to make any comment about the work of God in his child Myrna Nazzour.
    It was not her choice to receive the stigmata, it was God's choice. And God, being the Almighty, nothing is impossible to Him. Of course it is far beyond any understanding of a little rotten worm like you, Garvan. Show us whether whether you have the courage to publish this comment, if you are a real man or... just a devil.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Well first of I know you won’t be posting my comment for you..But here goes…I believe you are an evil man. I believe that there are many like you who represent the Devil himself. May God destroy you and all the evil around us. See what you do is simple…You merely try to down play our Lord Jesus and try to subdue our faith. When I read this all you do is merely uplift my faith and my belief on what happened to this angel on earth. As you read this you know that happened and you know where your soul is going and May God strike you with heavy vengeance because it is You who wants to destroy purity and Faith. I feel sorry for you but may God kill your soul and may you never be able to destroy another person’s faith..May Jesus come soon because we need him and Glory be to God forever and ever AMEN! And May God keep blessing Myrna as more people need to see the glory of God thru her!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Science itself is a religion(yesterdays scientific theories are proven myths my today's scientists and it will continue ), Of course there are fakers , but not all are fakers . God is giving a lot of signs to the world but there are people like you who doesn't want to listen to anybody and just live the life with all the sins and pleasure of the world ,and all of you know inside that there is a chance of a living god's existence, but dont want to accept that bcz you want to enjoy all the sinful pleausures of life , and want others to follow people like you as well and so in the name of science trying to mislead people. I have learend science a lot and have two PHD 's in it but when I learn more and more My faith in God Increases . If there are scientists who dismiss the concept of god then that is because of their EGO

    ReplyDelete
  28. I SAW THE WOUNDS OPEN AND NO METAL OBJECT WAS THERE I AM THE SURGEON WHO WAS CALLED IN BY THE CHURCH TO VERIFY I SAW ALL THE WOUNDS OF HEAD HANDS AND FEET OPEN INFRONT OF MY EYES MY REPORT IS SENT TO THE VATICAN, THE BLOOD WAS BRIGHT RED AND NOT DIRTY RED , THAT MEANS IT COMES FROM DEEP IN THE VEINS NOT SUPERFICIAL WITH A METAL CROSS OR ANYTHING ELSE I SAW TOO THE OIL OOZING OUT OF HER HANDS SUDDENLY LIKE THE WOUNDS I WAS WATCHING WITH MANY DOCTORS AND SHE COULD NOT FOOL A SURGEON SORRY FOR DISAPPOINTING YOU BUT SHE IS FOR REAL GOOGLE YOU TUBE TO THE STIGMATIST OF DAMASCUS AND HERE ALL THE MESSAGES FROM HEAVEN THIS IS A CALL AND YOU CAN GO TO WWW.CHRISTIANUNITYNOW.COM WISHING YOU THE BEST SHE IS REAL AND THE MESSAGE IS POWERFUL

    ReplyDelete
  29. To a person who does not believe, no explanation is possible. To a person who believes, no explanation is necessary.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Wow, all those loony comments really prove your point better than your own arguments. Thank you, christian nutters!

    ReplyDelete
  31. "The surgeon who was there" finds this blog, put CAPS LOCK on and shouts out the truth? Very random.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I will pray for you. May God Almighty opens your yes like he did with Saul of Tarsus/ Saint Paul.

    “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

    Lucia

    ReplyDelete
  33. I seen lot of this, a countless times!
    It's too sad for the People don't Know Jesus Christ!
    You keep wandering and forcing it's delusion!
    Please lower our pride!
    As A friends please deliver Yourself from him! There's no turning back in Afterlife!
    I hate those PEOPLE who sent from Hell and blamed his Friend for that denying TRUTH!

    I seen Jesus when I was a Kid, I visit some Familiar Places!

    Near Death Experience Patient seen Jesus! Thousand case of it! There's no Islam there but the believer of Isa Al Masi!

    Muslim dream about Muhammad cannot stare in Isa Al Masi's Eye or Jesus! This Muslim healer, A Tausug, can heal disease here in the Philippines. She is still a a Muslim!

    You must know him! Your Life is so short. There's no light in Islam! It gives you conditional faith not love!

    Heaven requires Unconditional Love and Isa Al Masi! Read Tawrat Injil and the Bible!


    I know it's revolting, and you want to challenge me!
    I know that! You also know that!

    For a man of Science! I know that this things in God's Will. A warning for Solar Storm in 2012!

    ReplyDelete
  34. You are a fucken idiot

    ReplyDelete
  35. For those who believe, no further explanation is necessary, for those who do not, no further miracle will suffice, stop analysing the work of god, and repent and pray

    ReplyDelete
  36. I REALLY WISH YOU WILL DELETE THIS ARTICLE' BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT A BELIEVER OF CHRIST

    AND YOU ARE THE ONE WHO WANTS ATTENTION NOT MYRNA'


    SHE IS VERY VERY BLESSED' AND YOU ARE TRYING TO BRING HER DOWN WITH THE REST OF YOUR NEGATIVE ARTICLE'S


    SO PLEASE HUNI . .

    STOP TRYING TO IMPRESS US WITH YOUR

    FAKE TESTIMONY 'S ABOUT


    ( LOOK AT THE SPEER'S AND THIS AND THAT )

    YOU HAVE NO CLUE WHAT JESUS WAS NAILED WITH ..


    AND YOU ACT LIKE WE SHOULD BELIEVE YOU .. ?

    TAKE YOUR COMPUTER AND INTERNET AND THROW IT IN THE GARBAGE


    AND GO TO CHURCH AND PRAY AND REPENT . AND PRAY

    THIS IS VERY REAL; ;




    VERY VERY REAL,,,,,,


    IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND THE SON AND THE HOLY SPIRIT

    1 GOD



    IN JESUS NAME
    AMEN .

    ReplyDelete
  37. I feel sorry for this ignorant Garvam. Obviously, he needs help. Let me ask everyone pray for him to lift him out of Satan's control!
    Regarding Myrna, she is a blessed and chosen person by God.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Great stuff! She's almost as good at misdirection and concealment of props as Sai Baba was at that sort of trickery.

    Check out 'Sai Baba Exposed' on youTube.
    He used a lot of the same techiques and more; he was very skilled at deception.

    There's nothing 'real' or spiritual about either of their performances.
    They are performers: slight-of-hand 'magicians'.

    Note: in every available video of Myrna Nazzour's supposed spontaneous extrusions of oil olive, she plays with her hands, then rubs her face.
    Sometimes, she can be seen putting something into her mouth, likely the remnants of the capsules that contained the oil.
    Her transfers are obvious: Sai Baba was a master of misdirection, and his transfers were not as obvious.

    The capsules are likely concealed in several places: under the robe; back of the neck, under the veil, in her mouth.
    Sai Baba secreted his props in several locations, too.

    Myrna Nazzour fumbles under her robe with one hand while rubbing her face or forehead with the other hand,
    then brings the hands together at her chest, transfers the capsule (perhaps she uses a poultice, though it is definitely very obvious at times, she puts something in her mouth after rubbing the oil on her face/forehead, which points more to a capsule as the oil container), keeping the one hand at her chest, and raising the other to her face and rubbing the oil on herself.
    Self-annointing!

    She's a fraud. Her husband is her closest accomplice/conspirator, and may have been the instigator of the entire charade of her career,
    given how it all began shortly after their marriage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am the Department Head of Clinical Microbiology at a centralized, diagnostic, research, and therapy-monitoring medical complex in the heart of Toronto, serving over 1500 patients daily. I have witnessed with my own eyes the exudation of oil from Myrna's hands. Your accusations of fraud lack credibility. Indeed, the various phenomena associated with Myrna's events (e.g., stigmata, miraculous cures, etc.) point to something supernatural, and may turn out to be among the greatest signs for our time.

      Shaker Farhat
      Toronto, Canada

      Delete
  39. Your cv, if genuine, does not lend you any credibility in this arena.
    You know what you ~think~ you saw.

    Are you a stage magician? Familiar with stage magic, misdirection, sleight of hand trickery?
    Obviously not.
    Fooling you and other 'true-believers' is easy for this sort of performer.
    Did you even bother to check out the Sai Baba Exposed videos on youTube?
    He used some the same stage magic techiques.
    The BBC spent good time deconstructing his tricks, using mulitple cameras and slow motion.
    You should watch it; there is a slim chance you might have the veil of occlusion removed;
    you might - if willing to be open minded: a lot to ask of a true believer - when confronted with the same bogus trickery performed by another be willing to recognize that your favorite performer is just that: another trickster: a performance artist/stage magician.

    Sai Baba was surrounded with supposedly intelligent, educated people such as you pose yourself to be;
    his act was still an act, its credibility enhanced by the supposedly intelligent dupes that supported his 3-bit charade.
    Kind of how you're attempting to use your supposed cv to enhance this huckster's credibility.

    'the greatest signs for our time'
    Some said the same of Padre Pio. In 2012, very few people even know who he was.

    "The founder of Milan's Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, friar, physician and psychologist Agostino Gemelli, concluded Padre Pio was "an ignorant and self-mutilating psychopath who exploited people's credulity.""

    The Catholic Church needs heroes, particularly now:
    their fan base is slipping: the faithful are dwindling: the income base is receding.
    Pump up the coffers! Pump up the stigmatics!
    Blessed art thou who pay the piper!

    Any evidence for how her performances will enhance life on earth for anyone in the future?
    Or even speculation as to what's she's to offer, other than an amateur stage magic show?

    What good is she really doing, other than giving some small comfort to the naive and ignorant?

    Regarding your title and position, I refer you to the second comment on this page: "It's hard to believe that people who can add, subtract, and walk straight, waste their intellects on such nonsense."

    You ought to put your intellect to work here, and turn off your imagination. She's exploiting your intellect by exploiting your imagination.

    But hey, if it works for you, enjoy!
    I've no stake in her game, and generally couldn't care less if you wish to remain self-deluded.
    Pull the wool over your own eyes; pay to know what you think. Go right ahead: have fun! Enjoy!

    ReplyDelete
  40. "Google is your friend."

    Googling Shaker Farhat reveals their predilection for other 'miracles'.

    "Submitted by Shaker Farhat
    The Holy Father's words during his apostolic visit to Portugal and pilgrimage to Fatima, that has just come to completion, are what should concern us most, rather than politicizing and speculating on the Fatima message."

    Fatuous.

    "3. No monetary donations are accepted. All distributions are gratuitous."
    Huh? How does that work? If no money is accepted, what are these 'distributions' you refer to?
    i.e. She doesn't charge, but her hubby and folks like your Toronto true-believer crowd hustle the rubes for 'donations'.
    Good job!

    Jesus didn't need donations, according to your favourite book.
    He created food for the needy, supposedly out of thin air.
    That's a trick worthy of a repeat:
    Myrna ought to feed the poor and needy with manna from heaven.
    That'd be a miracle.
    Jesus offered loaves and fishes. Myrna's menu might feature a mixed greens salad, on which the olive oil would go well.
    I'd like a side of hummous to with that, please.

    Yo, Shakey: you ought to stick to subjects you actually know a bit of something about, like the Efficacy of a Swab Transport System in Maintaining Viability of Neisseria gonorrhoeae.
    That's a subject worthy of pronouncements of fact on your part.
    Myrna the Magician is beyond your ken.

    ReplyDelete
  41. WHERE IS THE PROOF??? WHY IS THERE NO FOOTAGE WHATSOEVER OF THE WOUNDS OPENING UP SO THE WHOLE WORLD COULD SEE???? THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN FAIRLY EASY TO DO SINCE THIS HAS BEEN ALLEGEDLY HAPPENING FOR DECADES NOW!!!

    ReplyDelete
  42. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7viJwHtwnR4 "The miracle of Damascus part 22" watch closely after 3:30 she reaches behind her neck then she puts something into her mouth. Most likely the remnants of an olive oil capsule. It is very obvious.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp9IguRGC8w&list=PL2D120E183BCF7DC1&index=5 "The miracle of Damascus part 5" watch closely after 6:15 she places something into her mouth after he (her husband) wipes her mouth. Most likely it is a perfumed bath oil bead. Moments after she places it in her mouth, her husband claims "the smell of flowers" is on her breath.

    ReplyDelete
  43. What are you all so unfaithfull!

    It's real I have had the chance to met her! It's real. The churchhas also start an invesigation for recognizing this,

    Greetings, sacristian of the church in Kinrooi.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Soooo, because her wounds don't match the wounds of Jesus that you assume were made over 2000 years ago, she's a fake? Were you there to see the wounds... of Mirna or Jesus? It seems to me as though you have a point of view and are making up facts to support them.

    ReplyDelete
  45. It's pitiful, the arrogance of the OP in saying she knows what the Supreme Being would or would not "do". It's laughable that anyone would take any version of "truth" from an avowed atheist. By the way, atheism is a belief system, hate to tell you.

    The Roman Catholic Church (oh, I know, Jesus didn't actually exist in your philosophy so the Church is a farce, forgot that, tsk) has given its Imprimatur to these events after long and serious scrutiny. Yet you, self proclaimed expert in all things, of course say differently. So tell us all: how do we cure cancer? Since you know so much about God as to predict what God is doing or not doing, or to even espouse that God does not exist, curing cancer should be fairly simple for you, n'est-ce pas? Think again, sister. Your eternal soul is at stake here.

    ReplyDelete
  46. If we believe That jesus christ has risen from the dead or was resurrected,I don't need to see the wounds of this women to strenghten my faith in watching these stupid videos on you tube.
    In case these stigmata are true this women must keep humility and refuse to display any video. She must keep silence and entrust her story to her confessor. Otherwise, the Church bears responsibility in advertising these moovies , it would be a missed attempt for the corrupted clergy to recover its leadership on simple desperate human being in a disgusting way. It is really shameful to the LORD.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I believe in the metaphysical but Myrna makes me sceptical on account of the very Roman Catholic and theologically unsound messages she claims to convey.

    Take these: "This is my last commandment to you:
    Each one of you, return back home,
    however, hold the East in your hearts.
    From here a light emerged anew.
    You are its radiance in a world seduced by materialism, sensuality and fame,
    so much as to have almost lost its values.
    As for you, hold on to your Eastern identity.
    Do not allow your will, your freedom and your faith in this Orient to be taken away from you."

    How come the above reconciles with the bible's teaching that God is no respecter of persons? How come Jesus grew so chauvinistic?

    Also the actuality of this supposed promise is quite the opposite.

    "Mʏ ᴅᴀᴜɢʜᴛᴇʀ, Hᴏᴡ ʙᴇᴀᴜᴛɪғᴜʟ ɪs ᴛʜɪs ᴘʟᴀᴄᴇ.

    I sʜᴀʟʟ ʙᴜɪʟᴅ Mʏ ᴋɪɴɢᴅᴏᴍ ᴀɴᴅ Mʏ ᴘᴇᴀᴄᴇ ɪɴ ɪᴛ. "

    In Syria and especially in Damascus people kill each other most cruelly; they even resorted to biological weapons? No peace at all!

    ReplyDelete