Originally posted by RJHindsRJ... STOP trying.... base your faith on the words of god and jesus. ive seen many trinkets [the chians of peter and the foreskin of christ, the wood of the cross] do you need this??
I challenge you atheists to prove the Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium of Oviedo to be fake Christian relics and then I will stop posting my so-called nonsense on RHP.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJqoAef9VHA
1 edit
Originally posted by stokerYes, when the Pope decided to allow the Shroud of Turin to be examined by scientists, the purpose was to determine if the Shroud of Turin was a fake burial cloth of Jesus. That has yet to be done, because the scientist who did the dating tests were too stupid to ensure the cloth they tested was the actual linen from the Shroud of Turin. It was not discovered until after the tests had been done at 4 different laba that they had been testing cotton fibers dyed to look old like the linen of the Shroud.
RJ... STOP trying.... base your faith on the words of god and jesus. ive seen many trinkets [the chians of peter and the foreskin of christ, the wood of the cross] do you need this??
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsI'd say they either are christian relics or they are not. You don't need a scientist to determine which, you just have to ask a christian. I did that and he said "yes, they are christian relics if you happen to be a catholic christian". So there you have it, they are not fake relics.
I challenge you atheists to prove the Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium of Oviedo to be fake Christian relics and then I will stop posting my so-called nonsense on RHP.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJqoAef9VHA
Unfortunately that doesn't determine whether or not they have been in contact with anything vaguely godlike at any point in the past. For that you probably want a god to admit to wearing it at some point as I am not aware of any scientific test for being in close proximity to a deity at some time or another.
Just out of interest, what if the scientists rerun the tests and give a date that is more than 6000 years old?
Originally posted by KeplerIt would mean the scientists are still stupid. 😏
I'd say they either are christian relics or they are not. You don't need a scientist to determine which, you just have to ask a christian. I did that and he said "yes, they are christian relics if you happen to be a catholic christian". So there you have it, they are not fake relics.
Unfortunately that doesn't determine whether or not they have been in con ...[text shortened]... t, what if the scientists rerun the tests and give a date that is more than 6000 years old?
Originally posted by RJHindsYou said that if a scientist produced proof that contradicted your beliefs, then you would not accept the proof and conclude that the scientist is stupid.
I did not say anthing about scientist there.
I asked for clarification and your response was that you will only accept proof from someone who is not stupid or does not have his head up his arse.
So must I now conclude that your objection was not that they were scientists, but that their proof contradicts your beliefs?
So essentially you simply wont accept any proof that contradicts your beliefs.
So if you believe the Shroud of Turin is genuine, then you will not accept any proof that contradicts this.
So why did you bother even asking?