I was talking to a catholic friend of mine, and we were discussing how there is little evidence supporting his belief. He brought of the Shroud of Turin. I researched it and...its prettydifficult to explaine. WHat is a good responce to use next time someone brings it up? I did use "that is one unexplainable thing, there are infinite more explanable things that point the other way" and stuff like that...what are some explanations for this shroud???
He certainly has a lot of evidence for the resurrection by any historical standards. Meaning, there is more manuscript, archeological and even prophetic and sociological evidence than we could ever imagine asking for any historical figure. Now Im guessing you were talking about 'physical evidence' sorta thing? This would be a bit difficult I suppose because in this case we are talking about 'not finding a body' heh. Then again we could see the lack of physical evidence as 'evidence he did rise and ascend'. Anyways.. The Shroud of Turin. The first thing you need to know is that the Shroud of Turin is not 'part of the Christianity'. Its not a teaching, a tenet, a dogma, nothing is based on it, it doesnt need to exist or be real and is not part of the 'scheme of things' for Christians. The Roman Catholic church doesnt claim its Jesus burial cloth or that its a forgery. It just says that the 'object' is valuable in so far as those who look upon it are using it to meditate and contemplate sufferering of the innocent or Christs death. In a sense 'forgetting the object itself'. But could it really be the shroud from Jesus resurrection? Meh. I did like the one guy who was able to recreate something by painting a positive image on a sheet of glass, then laying the glass on a cloth and leaving it in the sun for a week. If you ask me that was the best explanation I had seen to the theory its an artists depiction. Then again they go and scan the thing and find there is an image on the back of it. This makes them think of some sort of electrostatic discharge (as in firing the image straight through). I mean this thing has been confounding us on so many levels it really does make you wonder if the 'original owner' didnt just leave some wild nuclear shadow on the thing. But again, its not one of 'Christianities holiest relics' or something 'Christians believe proves their faith' etc You will read those descriptions alot, usually by people who are trying to set you up. Its definately one of mankinds most intriguing and challenging curios though!
Yeah, I remember when they did that (late 80s i recall) and it was quite an exciting event. I swear I think it was hosted by Phil Donahue when they did a sort of 'Live Programme' out of the dating results. Anyways, those tests have been discredited since then. Partly because of objections made by some of the same people who did the testing as well as some other experts in that field. I honestly dont recall the exact problems but one russian guy pointed out the problem of the burnt materials, the sections they were allowed to use and something to do with pollen. Last I heard they were considering trying again but using different sections and standards.
Ah,, the shroud.. The ancient worlds version of a drunk secretary photocopying her twat on an office machine.. What a load of papist crud Occam
No, but I went to Catholic school and 'fairly' familiar with the Catechysm as well. But not an RC. Yeah, I think the fact its a 'negative' is what has really thrown everyone around on this. Now that last thing I saw them doing to recreate it was a 'Bas Relief' project. Basically, you make a statue, coat it with some chemicals (like salt or vinegar whatnot) Then you wrap the linen around the statue and leave it for a while. When you remove the linen you have a 'negative' image on the linen. I dunno, everytime they come up with an explanation everyone goes around screaming 'solved' but then it seems like something comes up that will totally throw that away. The Bas-relief thing does look pretty good so far. btw.. alot of people say 'is it a hoax or real'. Well, Honestly it doesnt have to be either. Back in the day there were artists making tributes (just like today really). It may have been a labour of love by some dedicated artist and never intended to 'fool people'. Then the 'Relic Mania' started and it changed hands etc. Or is it really the shroud???
^ so what was the other thread about? the decline of atheism...where yo were pretending to be christian(I think) I am lost anyways, back tot he shroud, does anyone believe it is jesuses burrial cloth? it was a negative image(atomic bomb heat needed to create that) carbon dating can not be done (hasn;t been done) on the 'non repaired' part. found in the same area as jesus was supposedly killed(proof? I have none, someoe backt hat up) any more?
Well obviously the best way for the Christian god to prove his own existence is to imprint Jesus' body on a cloth, and make Mary appear on toast.
At least know that the image on the Shroud is not there in the same way these other images appear. Its not a case of some random linen. The idea is that this is a burial cloth. A shroud. This was how you got 'buried' back then. What Erizoe is getting at here is the resurrection and how it may have happened. In the historical accounts, his followers enter the tomb and find his body missing but the burial shroud is still there. The 'theory' (well its just speculating) is that his transformation from a dead body to a live body involved some sort of .. what.. maybe a nuclear type vaporisation through the cloth. I mean we have no idea what this would mean because its not like people do this on occasion. We do know that when Jesus shows up after the resurrection, he is physically different and has some 'ghost' qualities (but is still 'physical' too). So, The idea here is that the negative image left on both the front, back and 'othersides' of the Linen are the consequences of some sort of electrostatic corona effect, some kind of 'nuclear shadow'. Erizoe.. I am a Bible believing Christian but in this case, the Shroud of Turin is something 'extra biblical' and isnt 'part of christianity' necessarily. Not in any sense of tenets, teachings, doctrines anything like that. Its INTERESTING. but it can be a hoax and that doesnt change anything for us. We already have the Gospels to tell us he resurrected as well as evidence in our own changed selves.
