Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, Moderators, move, protect, rollback, Administrators
27,336
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 17:
Line 17: − + − + − + − + − + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Shroud of Turin (view source)
Revision as of 12:08, December 28, 2015
, 12:08, December 28, 2015→Shroud of Turin
I know you conservative don't like Internet censorship. Neither do I. Instead of being hypocrites and censoring out other people's arguments, you could read mine, and leave it here, so other people may make up their own minds. Also, you may criticize my statements and debate them with well-founded evidence.
I know you conservative don't like Internet censorship. Neither do I. Instead of being hypocrites and censoring out other people's arguments, you could read mine, and leave it here, so other people may make up their own minds. Also, you may criticize my statements and debate them with well-founded evidence.
:''Fine then. Allow me.''
So, basically the Bible itself describes Jesus's burial garments as being completely different from the shroud presented: "Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie, And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself…" (John 20:1:6, KJV)
So, basically the Bible itself describes Jesus's burial garments as being completely different from the shroud presented: "Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie, And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself…" (John 20:1:6, KJV)
:''Bible describes just two items, and two items only. You talk about the "linen clothes" as if they were pants, shirt, and maybe socks. How about the "linen clothes" as being a seamless, single piece of cloth (the Shroud), and the "napkin" as this object[https://www.shroud.com/guscin.htm]?''
Also, Jewish burial customs didn't work this way. The type of woven cloth that was used in the shroud was not in use at the time of Jesus' life. It is also worth noting, the "bloodstains" observed on the cloth were determined by analysts to be a "combination of red ochre and vermilion tempera paint." Also, the "bloodstains" were still red. Blood turns brownish or blackish with age.
Also, Jewish burial customs didn't work this way. The type of woven cloth that was used in the shroud was not in use at the time of Jesus' life. It is also worth noting, the "bloodstains" observed on the cloth were determined by analysts to be a "combination of red ochre and vermilion tempera paint." Also, the "bloodstains" were still red. Blood turns brownish or blackish with age.
:''Jewish burial customs did work that way, whenever a dead person had to be buried quickly before the Sabbath took place. As far as your claims - and they are YOUR CLAIMS - pertaining to pigments being on the Shroud, that is still wishful thinking by atheists and the Jesus-hating crowd. There is not a single speck of artistic pigment anywhere on that object, and that fact has been proven time and time again. And the type of woven cloth that is the Shroud was weaved and sold during that time period in the Middle East.''
It should also be noted that the appearance of Jesus as it shows in the shroud doesn't add up. If Jesus was a Jewish man who lived in the Levant approximately 2,000 years ago, he would not have been this white "Aryan" you depict him to be. He would have been a relatively short Middle Easterner with curly-ish hair and dark skin. As a matter of fact, [[Josephus]] described Jesus as a short man (the measurements used at the time would equal 4'6" by today's means of measurements. The reasoning behind this is because people in that part of the world at the time were generally shorter. There's no debate about this.) who was balding, chubby, and with a unibrow. Depictions of him as a white man with a beard and long flowing hair typically come from European depictions based on the pre-Christian views of what a deity would have looked like. Pre-Christian European gods such as Thor, Odin, Zeus, Jupiter, Ares, Mars, Frey, Perun, and so on, featured long hair, beards (sometimes) and were physically fit and muscular. It's clear that these traditions didn't end with the Christianization of Europe and other places. They made Jesus appear in a way they would see as godly. Jesus didn't really look that way, he looked like any other Middle Easterner.
It should also be noted that the appearance of Jesus as it shows in the shroud doesn't add up. If Jesus was a Jewish man who lived in the Levant approximately 2,000 years ago, he would not have been this white "Aryan" you depict him to be. He would have been a relatively short Middle Easterner with curly-ish hair and dark skin. As a matter of fact, [[Josephus]] described Jesus as a short man (the measurements used at the time would equal 4'6" by today's means of measurements. The reasoning behind this is because people in that part of the world at the time were generally shorter. There's no debate about this.) who was balding, chubby, and with a unibrow. Depictions of him as a white man with a beard and long flowing hair typically come from European depictions based on the pre-Christian views of what a deity would have looked like. Pre-Christian European gods such as Thor, Odin, Zeus, Jupiter, Ares, Mars, Frey, Perun, and so on, featured long hair, beards (sometimes) and were physically fit and muscular. It's clear that these traditions didn't end with the Christianization of Europe and other places. They made Jesus appear in a way they would see as godly. Jesus didn't really look that way, he looked like any other Middle Easterner.
:''Middle-Easterners today are not the 4'6" type you portray they were in the past. What evidence did they use to get that height average? Five graves? Ten graves? A full dozen or two? And where did this "Aryan" garbage come from? I look at the Shroud now, and I don't see an "Aryan"; I see an individual whose face was beaten to an unrecognizable pulp, exactly as the Bible describes.''
The consensus here is that what is called the Shroud of Turin is the work of a Gothic artist from the Middle Ages. At least that's what most scientists think it is. But the vast majority, Christians included, are sure it is not directly related to the historical person that was Jesus.
The consensus here is that what is called the Shroud of Turin is the work of a Gothic artist from the Middle Ages. At least that's what most scientists think it is. But the vast majority, Christians included, are sure it is not directly related to the historical person that was Jesus.
:''The consensus can be whatever a large amount of people agree it should be, but that doesn't make it right. The "artist" thing never happened, and even using today's standards to try to get what an artists "could" have done back then resulted in gross distortions and failure. Try it yourself and see what results from your efforts.''
As far as atheist and agnostic scientists converting to Christianity over the foundations of the shroud, so what? Had I presented them the same argument, they would have been likely to have a better understanding of what was going on. Also, if they were scientific analysts with certification to study such an artifact, they would have seen right away that there is no blood, no bodily tissue, and no historical reference that could confirm this to be an actual person. You're all freaking out over a piece of really bad art that was done by someone you don't know in a time period that makes Christianity look really bad.
As far as atheist and agnostic scientists converting to Christianity over the foundations of the shroud, so what? Had I presented them the same argument, they would have been likely to have a better understanding of what was going on. Also, if they were scientific analysts with certification to study such an artifact, they would have seen right away that there is no blood, no bodily tissue, and no historical reference that could confirm this to be an actual person. You're all freaking out over a piece of really bad art that was done by someone you don't know in a time period that makes Christianity look really bad.
I'll be awaiting your response. [[User:Muhamad|Muhamad]] ([[User talk:Muhamad|talk]]) 20:43, 27 December 2015 (EST)
I'll be awaiting your response. [[User:Muhamad|Muhamad]] ([[User talk:Muhamad|talk]]) 20:43, 27 December 2015 (EST)
::The evidence here, Mr. "Muhamed" or whoever you are, is that you failed to do the required homework. You pompously believed your own bovine scatology in an effort to get us in this website to change our way of thinking. Since you quoted a passage from the New Testament to try to support what you implied, allow me to quote from the same book to describe you:
:::''Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,''
:::''And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.''
:::''Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:''
:::''Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.''
:::''For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:''
:::''And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.''
:::''And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;''
:::''Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,''
:::''Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,''
:::''Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:''
:::''Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.'' Romans, 1:22-32
::Did you change the Word of God into a lie, Mr. "Muhamad", just to further your own ends? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 07:08, 28 December 2015 (EST)
:Why do you think Conservapedia would seek a Muslim intermediary between themselves and atheists holding demonstratively corrupt standards? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 21:50, 27 December 2015 (EST)
:Why do you think Conservapedia would seek a Muslim intermediary between themselves and atheists holding demonstratively corrupt standards? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 21:50, 27 December 2015 (EST)