Re: The Shroud of Turin - Is It a Hoax?
Dorothy Parker wrote:The Shroud of Turin - Is It a Hoax?
It's just as real as that burnt grilled cheese sandwich which sold on Ebay with an image of Jesus on it.
Re: The Shroud of Turin - Is It a Hoax?
rosborne979 wrote:Dorothy Parker wrote:The Shroud of Turin - Is It a Hoax?
It's just as real as that burnt grilled cheese sandwich which sold on Ebay with an image of Jesus on it.
One wonders with all the images of Jesus and Mary found on sandwiches, tortillas, etc., how does anyone know what these ancient people looked like?
Aren't you answering your own question?
Ahhh, the image of God...
Anyone interested in buying a bridge in Brooklyn??
You will recieve a framed autographed picture of Jesus to treasure.
(Old Texas Radio Ad)
Joe(One of the few he signed with a ballpoint pen.)Nation
RexRed wrote:edgarblythe wrote:First, we have to establish that a real Jesus existed, before investing any belief in this object.
Whether if Jesus existed or not the story of Jesus exists and therefore the consciousness of his message.
That sort of thing leaves no impression on shrouds.
edgarblythe wrote:RexRed wrote:edgarblythe wrote:First, we have to establish that a real Jesus existed, before investing any belief in this object.
Whether if Jesus existed or not the story of Jesus exists and therefore the consciousness of his message.
That sort of thing leaves no impression on shrouds.
No, the image of Christ leaves impressions on souls...
One of the best of the PBS series "Secrets of the Dead:"
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/case_shroudchrist/index.html
It's just all too obvious. If the Bible can be edited to leave out "the word of God" that doesn't suit the theologists, why not a fake shroud not too dissimilar to that piece of toast with Christ's image on it. The point is, it's been proven a fake but there's been no successful effort to prove that it is real -- a daunting task to be sure and just as exasperating as tracing the history of the shroud. It's in the class of worshipping false images.
Matthew 26:12 For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial.
So it's a moisturizer stain?
Lightwizard wrote:So it's a moisturizer stain?
Haha
I heard once they they may have used oils from plants that are now extinct.
Extinct because they used so much of them. Right.
Gilgamesh almost did that to all the cedars in Lebanon.
Joe(pass the incense)Nation
Joe Nation wrote:Extinct because they used so much of them. Right.
Gilgamesh almost did that to all the cedars in Lebanon.
Joe(pass the incense)Nation
Joe, horti"culture" of the Bible is another thread...
edgarblythe wrote:First, we have to establish that a real Jesus existed, before investing any belief in this object.
There's
actual historical evidence from non-christians that he did exist.
Greenwitch wrote:My favorite is the story of the Virgin Mary's little pinky finger bones - there are five them in different churches.
Who told you that? Catholics believe she went up to heaven, alive. I couldn't even find it on Google...
If we had a flawless method of dating this thing.... flawless and ridiculously accurate... and it turned out that the rag is 1,975 years old (i.e. roughly the time Jesus was allegedly killed), Christians 'round the world would rally behind it as the sacred burial cloths of Christ, and somehow evidence that he was who the bible says he is.
If, however, the shroud were found, without question, to be 4,000 years old, Christians would brush it off as inaccurate, biased scientific rantings that have no bearing whatsoever on their faith.
Yet another piece of evidence that the religious right calls science a crock of s*** unless it supports what they already believe.
<sigh>
Strange it shows the image of a European face when Jesus and his countrymen were semitic.
A miracle.
Thos so-called evidence in Luciene's article are not "evidence." They are third hand accounts by people who personnally never "saw" jesus.
If jesus had actually existed during that period in time, there would have been many firsthand written accounts of the miracles delineated in the bible, but it's not. They are in fact scripts written by people with great imagination and third hand knowledge of events that they think occured based on myth.
The holy books that Jews, christians and muslims subscribe to are all loosely traceable to the Mosaic Torah written about 700BC. These are the foundations for all three religions, and the new book (or testament) were written by many authors at different periods of time long after the supposed "life of jesus." Any third hand account in support of such documents are suspect at best, and fictional at its core. There is no "evidence," only suppositions and hope.
