The Shroud of Turin...what do you think about it?

If true, the shroud means there was a death that lasted long enough to form an image of the face of the deceased.

I don't see evidence that such an effect would be possible in 3 days.

Regardless of that, the shroud being real does not mean there was a resurrection. It means there was a death.

As to the last, Christianity is certainly not the only religion that has had a resurrection as an element. In the timeframe of the creation of Christianity, Zoroastrianism included resurrection.

 

Wrong. Re-read my original message and see if you can put it together:

The image was not made of blood stains.

See above.

It's not hard to make a connection. It's always going to be faith based however certain artifacts like this lend credibility. Your faith in it's lack of authenticity is still a belief much the same.

 

Blood stains would be far faster. And, that is MY point, not yours.

Authenticity was not my main argument. Of course, being of the correct age does not prove authenticity. So, if the aging is correct it still isn't evidence of anything in the life of Jesus.

The main problem is that a shroud is evidence of death, not resurrection.

 

The man in the shroud of Turin in 3D

Possible because the burst of energy that created the image also left millions of data points. Think of the cloth read by LIDAR.

Look at the face of that man. Considering the fact that this is a one time phenomena and made by a burst of energy we can barely recreate a fraction of with our atomic accelerator.. I believe you are now looking at the face of Yeshua the Nazarene.. Jesus Christ , my Lord and Savior.

 

I find it interesting (or more than just interesting) that so many things in the Bible have been revealed in my lifetime.
The Association for Biblical Research are archeologist who have solid evidence of the truth of the Bible, the Curse Tablet being the latest.

I now use a filter that if information does not conform to what the Bible states, then I should be discounted or ignored.

 

This is another diversion from the true importance of Jesus' message.

 

It has been proven to be a fake. Twice. The first time was over 600 years ago.
It is as fake as any other supposed proof of the supernatural nature of Jesus, and we have no idea it was Jesus at all.

 

True.. the problem being, a certain number of people will worship the Shroud rather than the Lord.

 

True, yet that isn't even the worst part of the diversion.
Wasn't Jesus always pointing to the immaterial?

 

Are you serious?

You obviously know very little about the shroud. People have tried to COPY or reproduce the same thing artistically....can't be done. Makes more sense to actually know what you are talking about before spouting misinformation.

 

Because radio carbon dating puts it at roughly 1400 ad.
A tad difficult to reproduce something so old. The latest science confirms that the marks are from someone moving on the material over time.
Unless Jesus was wriggling after death, it is fake.

 

So why can't they make an exact copy? Mankind does not have the technology or ability to reproduce said shroud.

You don't think people have tried to make a copy to disprove the whole thing? Where is common sense in this matter....

 

We could take a cadaver and lay it to rest in the ME in a similar tomb with a similar shroud.

We could wait for 3 days.

We could then see whether what we have compares in ANY WAY to the "Turin" shroud.

 

You're waffling at this point, probably intentionally as you see the futility in your failed arguments. A supernatural flash of light removing the body from the cloth (ascenscion; another pillar of Christianity) had to occur at the right fraction to neither destroy the cloth and to leave an imprint. That's what the new dating method tells us. You like science only when it suits you?

No, it was one of your tangents. Your main argument was that the shroud has nothing to do with the main pillars of Christianity, except for the biggest one. I tried to correct you, but you don't seem to get it, or are being willfully obtuse. Who cares which it is.

 

He's named himself after the father of all lies, of course he's serious and a liar

 

Both times new evidence overturned the old. Science still wins, even with the most recent and accurate dating method.

 

Science says nothing about the supernatural. It's you who appeals to the supernatural, thus abandoning or even denying science.

The point I made was that the shroud doesn't prove anything.

Yes, the resurrection is a pillar of Christianity. But, the shroud of Turin is, at best, a relic.

 

Did you read this one?


There's an entire cottage industry around the Shroud. It's a mixed bag of academics, historians, apologists, and fraudsters in that crowd. I guess like anything else without definitive proof it's ripe for mythological romanticization.

 

You should really familiarize yourself with the human phenomena of apophenia and pareidolia.

 

LOL

 

You try to faithfully reproduce a thousand year old set of wriggles .
No wonder it has not been copied
And how do you know that was the body and face of he whom we call christ? We don't know what he actually looked like and it cannot be verified. That figure could be anyone's.

 

Amusing that "common sense" is called upon to confirm the 'authenticity' such an obviously inconsequential object.

 

We KNOW the shroud could not be so marked by laying it on the face of a newly dead man for a mere 3 days. That would be FAR FAR too short a time.

So, there was no alternative other than to create some sort of ridiculous supernatural event in order to support the story someone created.

 

You're trying to understand it as a result of natural events. You will never explain it that way.

 

Yes, you can simply ignore ALL aspects of what we know today concerning dating objects, how a dead face would impact a piece of cloth, how the cloth was passed through the ages as perfectly maintained chain of custody and preservation, etc.

After all, you can invoke TOTAL MAGIC at any point you desire - as per the "rules" of religious argument.

Still, I'd point out that the shroud can not possibly bear evidence to anything more than that Jesus died - just like Judaism and Islam believe.