28 Dec 05
Originally posted by KnightWulfe1. It doesn't prove anything about Jesus. Assuming there was a historical Jesus who was crucified (and hopefully, you're not one of the conspiracy-theorists claiming he never existed at all), it could be his.
If it is authentic from the Roman time period as a burial shroud, One, how does it prove that Jesus was alive - it could be from any burial....
The other question I have is why is the "image" on the Shroud depicting the standard "english" version of what Christ looked like. Look at the area from where he is supposed to be birthed.... Fair hair and pale skin are not traits of that region, or any region close to that one.
2. I don't see fair hair and pale skin on the Shroud. Do you?
28 Dec 05
Originally posted by lucifershammerYou took what I said out of context LH.
1. It doesn't prove anything about Jesus. Assuming there was a historical Jesus who was crucified (and hopefully, you're not one of the conspiracy-theorists claiming he never existed at all), it could be his.
2. I don't see fair hair and pale skin on the Shroud. Do you?
What I said was that the image is of the same male that is depicted in all of the "Jesus" imagery that you see, from the crucifix to paintings...The facial structure is of that male....which does not fit with the people of that region.
Another thing, and to be honest, I dont know if this was ever covered in an study of it
The image on the Shroud is as if the Shroud way just alid over top of him. In that period, correct practice was to wrap the cloth fully around the body numerous times. The image on the Shroud makes no sense, in that regard.
29 Dec 05
Actually there is a good book that involved the shroud of turin giving dna to a strong, southern american politician who has alzheimers or something. It was actually quite a good book, 'Seizure' by Robin Cook, fiction of course. This is obviously off topic but thought someone might want to know...
29 Dec 05
Originally posted by lucifershammeruh-huh. You're the one with no evidence to support his existence, beyond the pure fiction of the NT and 1700 years of brutal, iron-handed suppression of non-believers. You're the conspiracist, Hammy.
(and hopefully, you're not one of the conspiracy-theorists claiming he never existed at all?
29 Dec 05
Originally posted by David CWith all of Western civilization hinging on His time on earth, I would dare say the burden of proof is on you--- the guy hanging out at Trader Vic's, listening to an IPOD full of AirSupply songs--- to show the remaining world how Jesus never existed.
uh-huh. You're the one with no evidence to support his existence, beyond the pure fiction of the NT and 1700 years of brutal, iron-handed suppression of non-believers. You're the conspiracist, Hammy.
That'd be cool.
29 Dec 05
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI think that is a little over the top saying that all of Western civilization hinges on Jesus. Christianity has certainly played a major role, but Constantine could have just picked another mystery cult and everything would have hinged on that religion.
With all of Western civilization hinging on His time on earth, I would dare say the burden of proof is on you--- the guy hanging out at Trader Vic's, listening to an IPOD full of AirSupply songs--- to show the remaining world how Jesus never existed.
That'd be cool.
29 Dec 05
Originally posted by David CGood point. Communication explosions have always hindered the spread of the Good News, haven't they?
Age of Communication and Information, and there's not much you can do about that.
It seems like just yesterday they were putting the printing press together, for the sake of, hmmm. Anyone?
29 Dec 05
Originally posted by FreakyKBHOkay, so the first book printed was the bible. Reckon that's gonna be the case with the internet? More porn than religion on the net!
Good point. Communication explosions have always hindered the spread of the Good News, haven't they?
It seems like just yesterday they were putting the printing press together, for the sake of, hmmm. Anyone?
29 Dec 05
Originally posted by KnightWulfe1. IIRC all the Shroud actually tells us about the person in it had long hair and a beard. That's all. You'll find such people in every culture, every time period.
You took what I said out of context LH.
What I said was that the image is of the same male that is depicted in all of the "Jesus" imagery that you see, from the crucifix to paintings...The facial structure is of [b]that male....which does not fit with the people of that region.
Another thing, and to be honest, I dont know if this was ever covered ...[text shortened]... fully around the body numerous times. The image on the Shroud makes no sense, in that regard.[/b]
2. Again, IIRC, the image on the shroud does indeed correspond to it being wrapped around the person. That is one of the pieces of evidence cited against it being a forgery - the art forms of the 14th century were distinctly two-dimensional (you know what I mean).