Originally posted by menace71The face cloth is also available in Spain and has a history going back much further than can be verified for the shroud of Turin.
I remember watching a doc on this on TV and they were able to tell that part of the shroud came from and older piece and sometime in the middle ages they were sewn together the older piece with a much newer piece. Also they found pollen samples within the cloth and if I remember correctly they were able to state that the pollen spores were from the middle e ...[text shortened]... conclusively found there is a lot of hearsay evidence and stories about it but not concrete.
-Removed-Apparently you have not listened to any of the videos from an actual eyewitness that was able to actually hold and to investiagete the Shroud. No one can give you enough evidence to make you believe something you refuse to believe. Thia is just for those open to learn the truth like these investigators.
Originally posted by RJHindsIt is just possible (though by no means certain) that you will offend fewer people and be a better ambassador for Christ, if you were to drop the ridiculous smug grimace, which negates your closing line but says, in effect, Glory! Glory! Glory! To RJH, and up yours! to everybody else.:'(
He also says circumstantial evidence proved to him that it was the burial linen of Jesus. 😏
HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Holy! Holy! Holy!
Originally posted by CalJustPossible, but not likely.
It is just possible (though by no means certain) that you will offend fewer people and be a better ambassador for Christ, if you were to drop the ridiculous smug grimace, which negates your closing line but says, in effect, Glory! Glory! Glory! To RJH, and up yours! to everybody else.:'(
2 edits
-Removed-One more time. If you pay attenion to what he says in the video. The crucified man could not just be any crucified man. That man was crucified, beaten, whipped, mutilated, pierced in the side with a wound equal in size to a Roman spearhead, with no broken legs, pierced marks all over his head resembling what would be expected of a thorn bush squashed on his head.
All these wounds, he says, are consistent with only one man in history that was discribed to be crucified in this manner, and that was Jesus in the Holy Bible. It is different and more brutal than a normal crucifixion would be expected to be from known historical information.
We don't know what Jesus looked like, we don't have his blood type, or DNA, so the man can not be identified positively as Jesus. But the circumstantial evidence points overwhelming to someone of the fame of Jesus due partly to the fact that the burial linen was saved and revered instead of discarded.
Certain pollen embedded in the shroud comes from desert plants found no where else in the world but southern Israel around the Dead Sea. So that indicates that it was there at one time. Etc., etc, etc.
Look and listen to what is said about it in the video, if you are interested. If not, just forget about it.
P.S. One more thing I would like to point out. It is still not know how the image on the Shroud was made. There is no known way to reproduce all the properties of the image on the Shroud. I think that is because it was not an image made by man.
Originally posted by RJHindsThe key words, 'proved to him'. That would be because he is a dyed in the wool paulist and has an agenda to believe, just like the catholics and their relics.
He also says circumstantial evidence proved to him that it was the burial linen of Jesus. 😏
HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Holy! Holy! Holy!
