Tweet
Well it does show that something miraculous created the image and that something can't even be recreated by 21st century science. Certainly, this very fact lends great creedence to the claims of Jesus being the Messiah and son of god.
-
http://monkspider.blogspot.com/ -
Not really. I believe in God, and Im just playing devil's advocate here, but this wouldnt prove anything of the sort. Jesus could have been an alien.Originally posted by monkspider
Well it does show that something miraculous created the image and that something can't even be recreated by 21st century science. Certainly, this very fact lends great creedence to the claims of Jesus being the Messiah and son of god....people like to cry a lot... - Pekka
...we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority. - SnottyComment
-
Well several people have made fakes that are very similiar to the "real" one.
Just because we are not sure how it was made doesn't make it miracleous."In some of its more lunatic aspects, political correctness is merely ridiculous. But in the thinking behind it, there is something more sinister which is shown by the fact that already there are certain areas and topics where freedom of speech, in the sense of the right to open and frank discussion, is being gradually but significantly eroded." -- Judge Neil DenisonComment
-
Thats right, its like people who say "We couldnt even build the pyramids today!". What they fail to mention is that that is due to the fact that there is no demand today for big useless pyramids.Originally posted by Ignorance
Well several people have made fakes that are very similiar to the "real" one.
Just because we are not sure how it was made doesn't make it miracleous....people like to cry a lot... - Pekka
...we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority. - SnottyComment
-
There is actually no reason at all to assume that a medieval forger would have known less about Roman crucifixion techniques than we do today. He would have been nearly a thousand years closer to the time those techniques were used, and may have had access to much historical data since lost.
As for the image: there are three claims. It's blood, it's paint (red ocher), it's a miraculous radiation burn. People choose the option that fits their prejudices.
As for the "error" in carbon dating: this is clearly bunk. To produce such a huge error, the organic contaminant would have to be comparable in mass to the fabric itself: and that's assuming all the contaminant is 20th century. The older the contaminant, the more you'll need to skew the date. This implies that the Turin Shroud is a thick slab of cheese with linen fibers embedded in it. I think somebody would have noticed that.Comment
-
You miss the point. Belief in God is called Faith. Faith is the basis of Stigmata. No church I know of says that he was hung by his wrists, it is told that the wounds are in his hands. Therefore based on that belief ,their faith, when they have Stigmata, also based on their faith, they are going to have wounds in their hands. NOT where Jesus actually got nailed to the cross.Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Another interesting point about such faith issues are Stigmata. Supposedly, intensely devout people develop wounds exactly like the wounds Jesus received at the crucifixion from being nailed to the cross.
However, such wounds as they appear in photos of people are invariably incorrect, has they show wounds in the palms of the hands. Jesus was certainly not nailed to the cross through his palms, but rather his wrists. Had the nails been driven into his palms, the weight of his body would have been enough to cause the nails to rip through the top of his hands, thus he would have fallen from the cross. Besides that, it is well-documented that the method of crucifixion was always nailing at the wrists.
So unless God himself is making an error when he gives his faithful stigmata, I'd chalk it up to either hoaxes or psychosomatic occurences.Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust!Comment
-
Keep in mind would have been in 1200-1300, a time when most of the world's knowledge has been lost, or at least something as such as the exact details regarding Roman Execution, such as number of lashes, receiving lashes by being tied up and receiving them from both sides, details regarding crucifixion that were unknown until very recently, such as the nails actually penetrating the wrists rather than the palms. Even if he knew these details he would be timid to display them, since it would pertain showing an image of Christ naked, which is something absolutely unheard of in medevial times. All of this also assumes a medical knowledge that is 600 or 700 years ahead of his time, such as the effect driving nails through your wrists has, an exact, perfect knowledge of how blood flows, the effects of a post-mortem spear wound, etc, etc.Originally posted by Jack the Bodiless
There is actually no reason at all to assume that a medieval forger would have known less about Roman crucifixion techniques than we do today. He would have been nearly a thousand years closer to the time those techniques were used, and may have had access to much historical data since lost.
Well STURP, the team of scientists concluded 100% that there are no traces of any paint-like substance on the shroud in the 70's, see earlier in this thread for details. In 2001 it had been concluded by the study of the effects of radiation on textiles, that it was formed by a burst of radiation coming from the length and width of a body beneath the shroud.As for the image: there are three claims. It's blood, it's paint (red ocher), it's a miraculous radiation burn. People choose the option that fits their prejudices.
Not nescarrily so, I'm no expert on carbon dating, but the findings on the shroud have led to museums to round up various artifacts that were thought to be frauds due to carbon dating. Apparently using photomicrography, scientists found an organic bioplastic coating–a natural funguslike growth over the cloth’s fibers that would not have been removed by a standard cleaning. Here is something written on the subject.As for the "error" in carbon dating: this is clearly bunk. To produce such a huge error, the organic contaminant would have to be comparable in mass to the fabric itself: and that's assuming all the contaminant is 20th century. The older the contaminant, the more you'll need to skew the date. This implies that the Turin Shroud is a thick slab of cheese with linen fibers embedded in it. I think somebody would have noticed that.
"From Manchester Museum Egyptologist Dr.Rosalie David
Quite aside from its implications for the Turin Shroud, Dr.Garza-Valdes's identification of bioplastic accretions to ancient linen powerful enough to skew carbon dating readings has become of inevitable interest to archaeologists. And one prominent British Egyptologist who has been in touch with Dr.Garza- Valdes in this very regard is Dr.Rosalie David, well-known to BSTS textile expert the late John Tyrer as keeper of Egyptology at the Manchester Museum, and author of 16 books on Egyptology, including the popular Mysteries of the Mummies published in 1978. According to the Spring issue of the University of Texas house journal The Mission Dr.David has commented of Dr.Valdes's bioplastic finding: 'This could be a great breakthrough in understanding the ancient world. If this theory is correct, and there seems to be a lot of evidence it is, this would be a spot check to tell if artefacts in museums or for sale on the market are genuine or fakes.'
According to the same issue of The Mission the University of Arizona in Tucson is preparing carbon dating procedures to test Garza-Valdes's hypothesis on an ibis bird mummy that stylistically dates c.330-30 BC. Physicists will sample collagen from bone and compare its date to their dating of the mummy wrappings. Two mummy wrapping samples will be tested - one that will be cleansed of contaminants by the usual means employed for samples for radiocarbon dating, the other using a method developed by Valdes and Mattingly. This will be done to check if conventional cleaning fails to remove the bioplastic coating, as Dr.Valdes claims it does."http://monkspider.blogspot.com/Comment
-
Monkspider-
I believe in God, but you cant prove his existence. So if you like banging your head against a brick wall....carry on....people like to cry a lot... - Pekka
...we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority. - SnottyComment
-
Well there are few things that can be proven with absolute certainty. I just hope that those who don't believe could at least take the information I have shared in this thread under serious consideration.
http://monkspider.blogspot.com/Comment
-
God can't be proven. However the earthy trivialisms regarding him/her/it will be debated till the end of time. Carry on."It woulda been nice to have naked midgets serving us cocktails everyday." - Brandon Boyd of Incubus
"...gays who, because they just NEEDED their orgies..." -Mr. A. SpeerComment
-
Im sure they wont.Originally posted by monkspider
Well there are few things that can be proven with absolute certainty. I just hope that those who don't believe could at least take the information I have shared in this thread under serious consideration.
Atheists get a kick out of saying "there is no God", it makes them sound like they know enough about the universe to be sure that God doesnt exist....people like to cry a lot... - Pekka
...we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority. - SnottyComment
-
This is why I find atheism dumb.
Sure there may not be a God out there, but why take the chance? If there is a God, those who deny him are lost. If their isn't one you haven't lost anything believing in Him.
A belief in God is like car insurance. I don't need it everyday, but when that accident comes it sure is nice to have it there.Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust!Comment
-
Originally posted by Tuberski
This is why I find atheism dumb.
Sure there may not be a God out there, but why take the chance? If there is a God, those who deny him are lost. If their isn't one you haven't lost anything believing in Him.
A belief in God is like car insurance. I don't need it everyday, but when that accident comes it sure is nice to have it there.
What?Comment
-
STURP may have been mistaken. It would not be the first time for scientists to do that. With modern tools, who knows what they'd say now.Originally posted by monkspider
Well STURP, the team of scientists concluded 100% that there are no traces of any paint-like substance on the shroud in the 70's, see earlier in this thread for details. In 2001 it had been concluded by the study of the effects of radiation on textiles, that it was formed by a burst of radiation coming from the length and width of a body beneath the shroud.
And about the radiation, yes, someone has made similar markings to a cloth with radiation.
This, however, does not mean that the image on the shroud is made with radiation."In some of its more lunatic aspects, political correctness is merely ridiculous. But in the thinking behind it, there is something more sinister which is shown by the fact that already there are certain areas and topics where freedom of speech, in the sense of the right to open and frank discussion, is being gradually but significantly eroded." -- Judge Neil DenisonComment
-
Why should you be scared?Originally posted by Richelieu
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust!Comment
Comment