The Shroud Of Turin

[Jdombrowski89]

I'm not gonna waste my time on such silliness. I've had to counter-argue enough ridiculous theories with Perry Mason and the like. The idea that Jesus Christ did not exist is not only unabashedly blasphemous it's also historically inaccurate.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Agreed, Tom. Whether you like it or not, there is DOCUMENTED FACT that Christ did indeed exist. Whether you believe his word of the Bible, and his motivations however is a much more debatable. Refusing to believe Christ was an actual, historical human being is like saying in the fall of 1888 in London, that prostitutes weren't murdered either, or like saying the Holocaust is a complete hoax.

Regards,
Justin

[DVV]

You know what's silly? Someone using the word blasphemous with serious indignation and accusation.

It's always nice to be reminded that fundies walk amongst us, and we don't even live in Iran!

Ally, about Jesus....

My advice :
Read a bit before posting.


Or wait until one of your relatives starts a website on the subject.

Blessings.

[DVV]

I'm not gonna waste my time on such silliness. I've had to counter-argue enough ridiculous theories with Perry Mason and the like. The idea that Jesus Christ did not exist is not only unabashedly blasphemous it's also historically inaccurate.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Now we know Perry Mason is far more rational and smart than Ally.

Amitiés,
David

[DVV]

You know what's silly? Someone using the word blasphemous with serious indignation and accusation.

It's always nice to be reminded that fundies walk amongst us, and we don't even live in Iran!

I'm sure you know a lot about Iran.

Perhaps more than about the shroud.

[Ally]

You know what's silly? Someone using the word blasphemous with serious indignation and accusation.

It's always nice to be reminded that fundies walk amongst us, and we don't even live in Iran!

[Tom_Wescott]

Well there's a logical and fact-filled argument impossible to refute.

I'm not gonna waste my time on such silliness. I've had to counter-argue enough ridiculous theories with Perry Mason and the like. The idea that Jesus Christ did not exist is not only unabashedly blasphemous it's also historically inaccurate.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Celesta]

Blotchy rears his evil head again!

[Ally]

Bunch of blotchy-faced heathens. To say there's no evidence for Christ's existence is completely retarded.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Well there's a logical and fact-filled argument impossible to refute.

[Tom_Wescott]

Bunch of blotchy-faced heathens. To say there's no evidence for Christ's existence is completely retarded.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[DVV]

crucifiction.

Mike

In which case, thumbs up...!

[j.r-ahde]

Hello you all!

I remember seeing a tv-documentary, testing, how Jesus should look like after the shroud had been taken off the body.

Well; the best thing to describe the outlook, is, that he should have been like a green comics figure Hulk...

Meaning; the body dimensions get distorted, when the shroud is around the body!

All the best
Jukka

[The Good Michael]

David,

I'm sure that's correct. The shroud certainly looks like an image of a man who underwent crucifiction.

Mike

[DVV]

Understood, Mike.
At the same time, an American legist who has studied crucifixion for years (and proved, for example, that asphyxia wasn't the cause of death) said the image is consistent with that of a crucified (thumbs retracted, and some other details I can't remember).

Amitiés,
David

[belinda]

David,

My point was a response to someone talking about the perfection of anatomy of the shroud's image and the exact locations of wounds. If we have no primary sources for Jesus' existence, how can such things as perfection and wound location be used to bolster the pro-authenticity argument? Rhetorical question obviously.

Cheers,

Mike

Your point is very valid

[The Good Michael]

David,

My point was a response to someone talking about the perfection of anatomy of the shroud's image and the exact locations of wounds. If we have no primary sources for Jesus' existence, how can such things as perfection and wound location be used to bolster the pro-authenticity argument? Rhetorical question obviously.

Cheers,

Mike