05 Dec 11
8 edits
Originally posted by RJHinds
So you just ignore what you don't want to believe. Okay, put your head in your
buttocks then.
P.S. Must I have a PHD to be credible?
So you just ignore what you don't want to believe. Okay, put your head in your
buttocks then.
P.S. Must I have a PHD to be credible?
I said I put the Shroud business on the back burner.
For me it is lesser priority.
The face that I see depicted seems to me a religious artist's conception of what someone thinks Jesus looked like. It is a destraction because -
" ... even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him so no longer." (2 Cor. 4:16)
That face I see in the Shroud makes me very suspicious that religious hype is being played. The prophet Isaiah said there was nothing so attractive about the Messiah's appearance:
"He has no [attracting] form nor majesty that we should look upon Him." (Isa. 53:2a)
When I see that picture of a sturdy, strong jawed and bearded man with stricking manly features, I get a little suspicious that someone's imagination is at work there.
This seems like Hollywood getting Jeff Chandler to play Jesus in King of Kings. Do you buy that strong handsome image stuff shown in the Shroud ?
Personally, I would not put a lot of stock in the Shroud of Turin. If I ever change my mind maybe I'll let you know. If you regard it seriously, I respect that you do.
No, I do not expect you to have a Phd. to pass on some useful fellowship from which I could benefit.
06 Dec 11
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillI really didn't notice a strong handsome image. I guess what is handsome
So you just ignore what you don't want to believe. Okay, put your head in your
buttocks then.
P.S. Must I have a PHD to be credible?
I said I put the Shroud business on the back burner.
For me it is lesser priority.
The face that I see depicted seems to me a religious artist's conception of what someone thinks Jes expect you to have a Phd. to pass on some useful fellowship from which I could benefit.
is all in the eye of the beholder.
There are too many things that must be accounted for and so far our
scientists have not been able to do it. All the evidence pointed to the
fact that it was real, except for the carbon dating, and that is known to
be wrong.
http://www.skepticalspectacle.com/carbon14.htm
06 Dec 11
Originally posted by RJHindsWell I concede that may be true. For a fact, since our views are mutually incompatible, one of us is talking bollocks. Let us clarify; I contend that this 'relic' was manufactured by mundane methods which were certainly available to people during the period when it was first historically documented, whereas your position is that it was produced by some sort of magical activity by a divine being. How shall we decide? Occam's Razor? Public vote? Trial by fire? Pistols at dawn?
You apparently don't understand anything at all about the shroud. You are
speaking from complete ignorance.
06 Dec 11
Originally posted by avalanchethecatWe will have to let the scientific investigators continue their investigation.
Well I concede that may be true. For a fact, since our views are mutually incompatible, one of us is talking bollocks. Let us clarify; I contend that this 'relic' was manufactured by mundane methods which were certainly available to people during the period when it was first historically documented, whereas your position is that it was produced by so ...[text shortened]... ivine being. How shall we decide? Occam's Razor? Public vote? Trial by fire? Pistols at dawn?
Then review all their reports and see if there can be any consensus. It
appears to me the evidence is mounting on the side of it being real. The
latest exhibition of the shroud was in 2010 the next exhibition of the Shroud
is scheduled for 2025.
07 Dec 11
Originally posted by RJHindsOf course it appears to you to be real, you are totally deluded and scammed by the oldest scam on Earth.
We will have to let the scientific investigators continue their investigation.
Then review all their reports and see if there can be any consensus. It
appears to me the evidence is mounting on the side of it being real. The
latest exhibition of the shroud was in 2010 the next exhibition of the Shroud
is scheduled for 2025.
07 Dec 11
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillerror in transmission
What has happened to that man [b]Jesus Christ is that God has made Him universalized.
We know that a typical man can only talk to one or two people at a time. When person A has his attention he relinquishes his involvement, and person B may commence to hold his attention.
This is how a typical man may interact with one or two people at a time rips of the 1960s, I will not do so here. It is not something of which I am proud.[/b]
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
07 Dec 11
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsHe [sonhouse] was talking (I think, I could be wrong) about the shroud, and not the resurrection.
What proof do you have that the resurrection is the oldest scam on Earth?
I don't think he's [completely] right about either... I think there are older scams than these [And trying
to prove that there aren't is probably impossible or at least impractically hard].
However, I think it is clear in context that sonhouse was talking about the shroud,
who's authenticity is independent of the truth of 'the resurrection'.
So your response should be...
"What proof do you have that the shroud [of Turin] is the oldest scam on earth".
To which my response would be that it's probably not possible to prove its the oldest scam,
and focus on the more important issue of IS it a scam, and should we care.
The response to which is it isn't proven, but all the available evidence we have at the moment
(barring more testing) points to it being a scam/hoax, and while not conclusive it is reasonable to say
that on the balance of probability that it is a scam/hoax of medieval origin.
While this still leaves the possibility that it might be genuine this possibility is not likely.
And more to the point, not relevant.
I have said it before [to you], and probably will again, the shroud doesn't prove anything.
Even if it was genuinely wrapped around the body of JC after crucifixion this doesn't mean that
he was resurrected, OR, demonstrate anything about his life previous to that point.
It has no evidentiary value for demonstrating anything you care about or is important for your
religion.
It is not inconsistent with your religious myths, but that is not the same as evidence for your myths.
EDIT: And even if it is dated to the relevant period, that doesn't prove who it was wrapped around,
Lots of people got crucified back in the day, you have no evidence that proves that it was wrapped
around any particular person. (while the image purportedly shows things that were supposed to have
happened to JC, for this to be convincing you would have to show that they were unique to JC and
nobody else, which is practically impossible.)
08 Dec 11
2 edits
Originally posted by googlefudgeIf he is talking about the Shroud of Turin, then he is diffently wrong because
He [sonhouse] was talking (I think, I could be wrong) about the shroud, and not the resurrection.
I don't think he's [completely] right about either... I think there are older scams than these [And trying
to prove that there aren't is probably impossible or at least impractically hard].
However, I think it is clear in context ow that they were unique to JC and
nobody else, which is practically impossible.)
I know for sure that it has not been proven to be a scam. And for your claim
about all the evidence pointing to the probability that it is a scam/hoax of
medieval origin is simply not true. There has not been one genuine piece
of evidence presented to support your claim. In fact everything that has
been tested and confirmed points to it being the real thing. For it indicates
a man beaten, crucified, and pierced in the side exactly in the same way
that Christ was according to the New Testament. It is highly unlikely that
any other man crucified would also have the blood marks of the crown of
thorns. And why would anyone save the burial shroud of just any man?
P.S. I would say the circumstantial evidence is more than enough to
conclude this Shroud of Turin is the burial shroud of Christ. There is no
alternative person that I can think of that someone would take the burial
shroud off of the dead body and keep it. It must be Yahshua.
09 Dec 11
Originally posted by RJHindsActually, I was talking about the advent of christianity, which should be called Paulanity but it was a huge scam, starting with the 'virgin' birth, ending with the 'resurrection of jesus'. The Turin scam came about 1300 years later.
If he is talking about the Shroud of Turin, then he is diffently wrong because
I know for sure that it has not been proven to be a scam. And for your claim
about all the evidence pointing to the probability that it is a scam/hoax of
medieval origin is simply not true. There has not been one genuine piece
of evidence presented to support your claim. In ...[text shortened]... hat someone would take the burial
shroud off of the dead body and keep it. It must be Yahshua.
09 Dec 11
Originally posted by sonhouseWell, as far as I know that has not been proven a scam either.
Actually, I was talking about the advent of christianity, which should be called Paulanity but it was a huge scam, starting with the 'virgin' birth, ending with the 'resurrection of jesus'. The Turin scam came about 1300 years later.
10 Dec 11
1 edit
Christ is truely glorious. It is too bad that the poster who started this thread under the name "Faith No More" seems to have only done so to leave with a showy display of disappointment.
And the posters seems to come from the land of Emmanuel, Israel, the very place of where Christ's throne will be in Jerusalem in the millennial kingdom.
Anyway, the thread title "glorious jesus" is pretty good. There is a Man in the glory. There is a Man at the highest peak of the universe. There is a Man - a God-man on the throne of this universe. This is great news for mankind.
I think the remainder of this thread I will speak some about the Old Testament prophecies and promises of the Christ reigning over the earth from Israel in the soon to come future.
That is the land of Emmanuel - the land of "God with us".