glorious jesus

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Well I am just happy to spawn interest and perhaps share something new from my perspective.
It may not be a totally christian perspective, but it is a spiritual one and one that recognizes christs divinity.
As for where threads go, this is the spirituality forum not a christian forum, as I seem to have to keep repeating. You cant expect non christian ...[text shortened]... he bible . In fact the bible is way down on my list of books to turn to for spiritual knowledge.

As for where threads go, this is the spirituality forum not a christian forum, as I seem to have to keep repeating.

I think you must have repeated this a few times.

Since I have participated in this Forum I have practiced not to go out of my way to interfere with others of other faiths who wish to express or teach about those. Exceptions would be if and when they said something about the Christian faith which I thought required a reply.

Moslems have expressed their thoughts here without my interfering.
Hindus and Buddhists have also.

You have not found me insisting that the Spirituality Forum is a sole subsidiary of the Christian Gospel. I can only speak for my own practice.

If you want to teach about your spirituality, please knock yourself out.
Criticisms of the Christian Faith, however, I may comment on if I noticed it.

I have not insisted that other beliefs cannot be expressed here.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Here's a thought experiment for you RJH. First, paint yourself from head to foot. Second, take a sheet and get someone to wrap it around you shroud fashion. Then, wait for paint to dry. Finally unwrap and examine sheet. Do you think the transferred image will be a perfectly proportioned, undistorted image of your no doubt rugged and handsome features?

You apparently don't understand anything at all about the shroud. You are
speaking from complete ignorance.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
But Guatam Buddha was said to be a real person, who "faced his own demons" , spawned a religion. So was KRSNA.

RJHinds seems to think that because Jesus said he was "Gods only son" , whatever that meant in his time, and done miracoulous things, well so too are miracoulous things claimed of these others.

As I said, all the masters had their own s ...[text shortened]... y I am the way I am. other wise I would not be here and I would be none the wiser.

Like I said Jesus (Yahshua) did much more than any of your Buddhas.
There is no comparison.

Originally posted by Faith No More
JESUS CHRIST

never again will I enter this forum

You are either strongly for Christ or Strongly against Him. He does not
want lukewarm Christians. He said they are like lukewarm water which
He will spew out of His mouth.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Like I said Jesus (Yahshua) did much more than any of your Buddhas.
There is no comparison.

No. He did different things.


I am not going to say that he was better,although thats what I think.
I'd like to rise above my own prejudices and be as fair and just as possible in my appraisal of spiritual persons.

The way I see it is that those who have attained enlightenment, there is no race with them, there is no better or worse or any other dualisms that we mortals carry around with us like an immensly heavy set of chains around our necks for no good reason.

But to say "there is no comparison" is really a bit too defensive. For you there is no comparison, for many a religious scholar there is more than enough reasonable grounds for comparison.
You have a right to your opinion, but thats just what it is, as is mine.

Originally posted by RJHinds
You are either strongly for Christ or Strongly against Him. He does not
want lukewarm Christians. He said they are like lukewarm water which
He will spew out of His mouth.

So what am I?

I believe in Jesus. I am not a christian. And I too hate "lukewarm spirituality".

Feel free to ask me further questions regarding my "beliefs" in JC if you do not know where to place me. I am curious as to see what you will come up with.

Originally posted by jaywill

But after Peter went in and saw both the
shroud and the sudarium with the image of Jesus on them, John looked
again and then he believed.

Could you please quote the words in the 20th chapter of John's Gospel which say anyone say the image of Jesus on anything left in the tomb ?

It was not the empty tomb that convinced them for the women told
them that the body was taken away and they did not know where they
had layed Him. It was after examining the Shroud and the Sudarium
that they both believed. They did not mention the image but since
we know the image is there, it stands to reason that was the only
thing it could be. The grave linen alone would not be enough to convince
me. But one with the image of Jesus on it would be a miracle for that
time as it still is today. Apparently they kept the linen which should be
considered unclean, if it had touched a dead body. However, Jesus
was not dead and in amazement, they saw his image. Common sense.

Originally posted by jaywill

As for where threads go, this is the spirituality forum not a christian forum, as I seem to have to keep repeating.

I think you must have repeated this a few times.

Since I have participated in this Forum I have practiced not to go out of my way to interfere with others of other faiths who wish to express or teach about those. Excep ...[text shortened]... comment on if I noticed it.

I have not insisted that other beliefs cannot be expressed here.

I'm pretty sure that you were one of the last christians I had in mind when I wrote that. In fact, if every christian here were upto your callibre, then I'm absolutely positive there would be no need for me to mention it.

And yes, you should stick up for your beliefs when people are talking about them. I wholeheartedly agree with that also.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
I'm pretty sure that you were one of the last christians I had in mind when I wrote that. In fact, if every christian here were upto your callibre, then I'm absolutely positive there would be no need for me to mention it.

And yes, you should stick up for your beliefs when people are talking about them. I wholeheartedly agree with that also.

Okay. Thanks.

Originally posted by RJHinds
It was not the empty tomb that convinced them for the women told
them that the body was taken away and they did not know where they
had layed Him. It was after examining the Shroud and the Sudarium
that they both believed. They did not mention the image but since
we know the image is there, it stands to reason that was the only
thing it could be. The ...[text shortened]... a dead body. However, Jesus
was not dead and in amazement, they saw his image. Common sense.

It was not the empty tomb that convinced them for the women told
them that the body was taken away and they did not know where they
had layed Him. It was after examining the Shroud and the Sudarium
that they both believed. They did not mention the image but since
we know the image is there, it stands to reason that was the only
thing it could be. The grave linen alone would not be enough to convince
me. But one with the image of Jesus on it would be a miracle for that
time as it still is today. Apparently they kept the linen which should be
considered unclean, if it had touched a dead body. However, Jesus
was not dead and in amazement, they saw his image. Common sense.

I think you are going down a risky road of so-called "common sense" of imagination.

There is nothing in the New Testament about the disciples examining or discussing a shroud. Not a word is written about them saving the grave clothing.

You better stict to what is written. If you go down that road of inference others can do the same thing.

Nothing either is said about the nails used, the cross used, the goblet or cup used, the robe used, the sandles used, the spices or remains of them, the stone used as a door to the tomb, the spear of the guards (if they had them), the swords or helmets of the guards, etc. etc.

I think we should build our faith upon what is written and of course our having received the Holy Spirit into our human spirit. Chasing artifacts kepted by the Roman Catholic Church, whether, cups, or pieces of wood, or shrouds is not reliable. The word and the Spirit we can stand upon.

"He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit" (1 Cor. 6:17)

"The Spirit Himself witnesses with our spirit that we are the children of God." (Rom. 8:16)

Originally posted by jaywill
[quote] It was not the empty tomb that convinced them for the women told
them that the body was taken away and they did not know where they
had layed Him. It was after examining the Shroud and the Sudarium
that they both believed. They did not mention the image but since
we know the image is there, it stands to reason that was the only
thing it cou pirit Himself witnesses with our spirit that we are the children of God." (Rom. 8:16) [/b]

There was nothing in The New Testament that mentions anything about
Friday or Wednesday being the day of the crucifixion either but we can
figure it out which day it was by using common sense in evaluating the
evidence. I do not believe that we must limit ourselves to the evidence
only stated in the Holy Bible. There are many things we would not be able
to understand properly if we did that. God gave us our brain so we can
imagine how things might be in order to solve problems. I believe this
is one that falls under that category. We have the evidence of the Shroud
and the Sudarium, which are not imaginary and no one has been able to
figure out how the 3-D image could be produced other than a miracle.
I have read much on them and you should not dismiss them so easily
without knowing anything about them. It is clear to me that it was not
just the empty tomb that caused Peter and John to believe in the
resurrection. They could easily see Jesus was not in the tomb when they
first arrived and that did not do it. John even saw the burial linen lying
there. It was not until Peter went in the tomb and paid special attention
to the Shroud and the Sudarium that John also came in to take a look.

So she ran and came to Simon Peter and to the other disciple whom Jesus
loved, and said to them, “They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and
we do not know where they have laid Him.” So Peter and the other disciple
went forth, and they were going to the tomb. The two were running together;
and the other disciple ran ahead faster than Peter and came to the tomb first;
and stooping and looking in, he saw the linen wrappings lying there; but he did
not go in. And so Simon Peter also came, following him, and entered the
tomb; and he saw the linen wrappings lying there, and the face-cloth which
had been on His head, not lying with the linen wrappings, but rolled up in a
place by itself. So the other disciple who had first come to the tomb then also
entered, and he saw and believed. (John 20:2-8)

One could say that they believed he was not in the tomb, simple as that.
But what was John's reason for not believing that when he first looked in?
He saw then that only the linen was lying there and there was no Jesus.
He should have believed then if that was all that was meant by what he
believed. If he could see the linen lying there, he should have also easily
seen that a body about 6 ft tall was not there. So what was it the he had
to actually go in to see that he could not see by stooping and looking in?
I believe it was the image of Jesus on the Shroud. After Peter had already
examined them, John came in and he saw and believed.

P.S. He definitely believed something related to the burial linen.
In my mind there are only three choices.
1. Jesus was not in the tomb
2. Jesus had been resurrected
3. An image of Jesus was on the Shroud.

Could it be that Peter told John to come in and see the image?
Maybe he saw and believed Peter. Actually that seems more
likely than the other two choices to me.

I had a lot of typing errors in this. I am not that great a typist.
I hope I corrected them all now. Even an error in my correction.

Originally posted by RJHinds
There was nothing in The New Testament that mentions anything about
Friday or Wednesday being the day of the crucifixion either but we can
figure it out which day it was by using common sense in evaluating the
evidence. I do not believe that we must limit ourselves to the evidence
only stated in the Holy Bible. There are many things we would not be abl am not that great a typist.
I hope I corrected them all now. Even an error in my correction.

The two were running together;
and the other disciple ran ahead faster than Peter and came to the tomb first;
and stooping and looking in, he saw the linen wrappings lying there; but he did
not go in. And so Simon Peter also came, following him, and entered the
tomb; and he saw the linen wrappings lying there, and the face-cloth which
had been on His head, not lying with the linen wrappings, but rolled up in a
place by itself. So the other disciple who had first come to the tomb then also
entered, and he saw and believed. (John 20:2-8)

Verse 8 says "At that time therefore the other disciple also, who came first to the tomb, entered, and he saw and beleived."

Do you think you can insist that it was only at that moment he believed ? The Gospel writer (who I believe is John), out ran Peter. How do I know that while he was running he did not believe ? It may be communicated that he believed at some time or another.

I mean "At that time therefore the other discple also, ... he saw and believed."


I don't know how strong a case you can make from this verse that up to that point he did not believe that Christ had been raised.

How much of a case can you make that they gazed into the cloth, noticed the outline of a face ?

One could say that they believed he was not in the tomb, simple as that.
But what was John's reason for not believing that when he first looked in?
He saw then that only the linen was lying there and there was no Jesus.
He should have believed then if that was all that was meant by what he
believed. If he could see the linen lying there, he should have also easily
seen that a body about 6 ft tall was not there. So what was it the he had
to actually go in to see that he could not see by stooping and looking in?
I believe it was the image of Jesus on the Shroud. After Peter had already
examined them, John came in and he saw and believed.

Well the only detail John gives us is that "the handkerchief which had been over His head, not lying with the linen cloths, but FOLDED UP IN ONE PLACE APART" (my emphasis)

I cannot insist that they did not gaze into the material and notice an image of a face. Neither can I insist that they did, from those details.

Personally, I think John mentions that the cloth that covered the face of Jesus was folded up apart to demonstrate a calm, composed, ever orderly, even "neat" resurrection of Jesus.

If I were brought back to life I would have probably ripped the grave cloths off and thrown them sloppily across the other end of the room. That they were folded up neatly suggest a perfectly composed and self control resurrection of this Man - just the way He handled everything else in life. That is with dignity, composure, self control, and carefully measured appropriateness.
That is how the Son of God lived. That is how He dismissed His spirit in death. And that is also how He rose again from the dead.

What you say is interesting. And as long as we agree that He did rise, I can think of worse things to argue about. But the image in the cloth business is not recorded by any of the evangelists.

That is not to say that there was not such a thing. It is to say the Holy Spirit did not prompt them to emphasize such a matter. You do so on your own risk, IF you intend to make it a MAJOR foundational factor of our Christian faith.

I would not elevate such a matter above the following pieces of evidence that John does clearly supply:

1.) He appears to Mary (20:16,17) .

2.) He appears to the disciples showing them His hands and His feet (20:20)

3.) He breaths into them and causes them to receive the Holy Spirit (20:22).

4.) He deals seperately with the skeptical disciple Thomas challenging him to put his hands into His healed wounds (20:25-27)

5.) He appears again and repeats an old miracle of the huge fish catch confirming that He is still the Master that called them in the beginning (21:1-14)

6.) He eats breakfast with them (21:9-15a)

7.) He gives particular attention to Peter, giving Peter three chances to tell Him that he does love Him - once for each previous denial. (Peter was somewhat of the leader among the disciples and called for special treatment) (21:15-27)

Now these are some of the details John DOES definitely recount for us. The higher priority, I think, should go to that. The image blasted into the Shroud of Turin may be interesting. So some of the apochryphal writings are interesting. But I do not stand on them before I stand on the canon of the New Testament.

The Shroud matter is like the epistle of Barnabus or the Gospel of Mary or Peter - apochryphal, dubious at best, and risky.

Even if it is real, even if they could demonstrate that the DNA in the cloth is that of Jesus, I would put it on the back burner to what is told us unambiguously in the New Testament.

P.S. He definitely believed something related to the burial linen.
In my mind there are only three choices.
1. Jesus was not in the tomb
2. Jesus had been resurrected
3. An image of Jesus was on the Shroud.

Could it be that Peter told John to come in and see the image?
Maybe he saw and believed Peter. Actually that seems more
likely than the other two choices to me.

Of course it "could be". But it also could not be.

Originally posted by jaywill

The two were running together;
and the other disciple ran ahead faster than Peter and came to the tomb first;
and stooping and looking in, he saw the linen wrappings lying there; but he did
not go in. And so Simon Peter also came, following him, and entered the
tomb; and he saw the linen wrappings lying there, and the face-cloth which
had b ...[text shortened]... choices to me.

Of course it "could be". But it also could not be.

What then did he believe and why to you think that?

Originally posted by RJHinds
Like I said Jesus (Yahshua) did much more than any of your Buddhas.
There is no comparison.

My Lord Xenu could take your Jesus in a deity royal-rumble. Jesus may be able to walk on water, heal the sick, etc., but Xenu comes with hydrogen bombs and a DC-8! Nobody beats a DC-8.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Like I said Jesus (Yahshua) did much more than any of your Buddhas.
There is no comparison.

My Lord Xenu could take your Jesus in a deity royal-rumble. Jesus may be able to walk on water, heal the sick, etc., but Xenu comes with hydrogen bombs and a DC-8! Nobody beats a DC-8.