[Misc] Christians seem to be really good people

[kuzushi]

It is your false logic, clearly the image is of a crucified man, the question is how it came to be there. That STURP make the same leaps you do makes me think they may have had a bias.

Wow, you're so desperate for it to be fake, you're even prepared to ignore the evidence of impartial scientists. It was a team of scientists made up of people of all sorts of backgrounds and faiths.

I will take issue with the wording of the statement that it is "not the product of an artist", they may be able say that it is not the product of applied pigment, but unless they know how the image did come to be there, they cannot say it was not an artist.

That was their conclusion, that it was not done by an artist, based on the fact that they deem it to show a person who has actually been scourged and crucified. I suppose if an artist had actually scourged and crucified someone in order to make the image and blood stains then it would be done by an artist. Is that what you think? That the forger actually crucified someone to make the image?

No they don't, some conclude they don't know, and others say it is fake. Its a sin to lie. Show me than the scientist that concludes it is genuine.

I'm not saying that they said it was Jesus, but they said that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin.

If shows a real crucifixion victim, and it was not done by an artist, that means it is a real burial cloth, not an artwork. That's what I mean by genuine.

 

[Triggaaar]

The age of the shroud has been tested several times in different ways.
Other methods date it to the time of Jesus.
Only the 1988 test gives a different result.

The reason they took a piece of the cloth to be carbon dated, is because it's accepted as the most accurate way to date something. It was dated to several centuries after the time of Jesus. Get over it.

It matches the description of Jesus based on the rather unique wounds described in the gospels

There's nothing unique about it. Some victims would have had their legs broken, some wouldn't. Some would have a sword stuck in them, some wouldn't. If one were wanting to fake the Shroud (and many things were faked) it would make sense to use a victim whose injuries matched that of the person you're claiming the Shroud was from.

You're putting all your faith in the discredited 1988 test.

It's not discredited. People like you who desperately wanted the Shroud to be genuine have tried and failed to discredit it.

I'm sorry to say that you've become a bit of a laughing stock @kuzushi

 

[kuzushi]

The reason they took a piece of the cloth to be carbon dated, is because it's accepted as the most accurate way to date something. It was dated to several centuries after the time of Jesus. Get over it.

Yes, no one is saying the test wasn't accurate, but it looks like they accurately dated a repair patch, not part of the original cloth. STURP director Ray Rogers admitted that.

 

[Triggaaar]

Yes, no one is saying the test wasn't accurate, but it looks like they accurately dated a repair patch, not part of the original cloth.

No, it doesn't look like that at all. The people conducting the report said those claims were nonsense.

STURP director Ray Rogers admitted that.

Ray Rogers was NOT the director of STURP. You've said that a few times, and each time I've pointed out your error, and you just ignore it and repeat it again and again. STURP was headed by nuclear physicist Tom D'Muhala. Rogers was a Chemist, and not overall director of the project.

You are not interested in facts, just repeating false claims to back up your imaginary god. You have been proven wrong on every claim you make. I'm sorry, but I'm done discussing this with you.

 

[kuzushi]

Ray Rogers was NOT the director of STURP. You've said that a few times, and each time I've pointed out your error, and you just ignore it and repeat it again and again. STURP was headed by nuclear physicist Tom D'Muhala.

Correct, but he was still a director to the project and he admitted that the sample they tested was a repair patch.
If anything he was probably better positioned to be able to comment on the sample that was tested than D'Muhala was.

 

[kuzushi]

There's nothing unique about it. Some victims would have had their legs broken, some wouldn't. Some would have a sword stuck in them, some wouldn't.

It was a Roman spear not a sword, and the wound in the side of the man on the shroud exactly matches that of a Roman spear, as described in the gospels.

If one were wanting to fake the Shroud (and many things were faked) it would make sense to use a victim whose injuries matched that of the person you're claiming the Shroud was from.

So where would they find this victim?

It's not discredited. People like you who desperately wanted the Shroud to be genuine have tried and failed to discredit it.

It is. It's been shown to be from a sample not consistent with the rest of the shroud.
I don't desperately want it to be genuine. You seem to desperately want it not to be genuine.

I'm sorry to say that you've become a bit of a laughing stock @kuzushi

It won't matter, will it, if I'm right, which I am.

 

[Baldseagull]

Wow, you're so desperate for it to be fake, you're even prepared to ignore the evidence of impartial scientists. It was a team of scientists made up of people of all sorts of backgrounds and faiths.


That was their conclusion, that it was not done by an artist, based on the fact that they deem it to show a person who has actually been scourged and crucified. I suppose if an artist had actually scourged and crucified someone in order to make the image and blood stains then it would be done by an artist. Is that what you think? That the forger actually crucified someone to make the image?


I'm not saying that they said it was Jesus, but they said that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin.

If shows a real crucifixion victim, and it was not done by an artist, that means it is a real burial cloth, not an artwork. That's what I mean by genuine.

I was going to counter these points again, but what is the point?
You have ignored the request to back up your false claims about the cloth being akin to others found from the time and region.
You have ignored the request for something more credible than your word that stains match some other bullshit relic.

 

[Baldseagull]

It was a Roman spear not a sword, and the wound in the side of the man on the shroud exactly matches that of a Roman spear, as described in the gospels.

Gospel, in the singular, only John mentions him getting stuck with a spear, John also says he was washed, and wrapped in strips of linen, with a ton of oils and perfumes.

 

[Baldseagull]

No, it doesn't look like that at all. The people conducting the report said those claims were nonsense.



Ray Rogers was NOT the director of STURP. You've said that a few times, and each time I've pointed out your error, and you just ignore it and repeat it again and again. STURP was headed by nuclear physicist Tom D'Muhala. Rogers was a Chemist, and not overall director of the project.

You are not interested in facts, just repeating false claims to back up your imaginary god. You have been proven wrong on every claim you make. I'm sorry, but I'm done discussing this with you.

As Kuzushi could not or would not show me any evidence for his claims of the shroud of Turin and this other facecloth "relic" he mentions having points of congruence that prove they were placed on the same face, I had to go and find out who had originally made this claim.
It was Dr. Alan Whanger (apt), he and his wife developed a technique of overlaying images, and made this finding by eye, so comparisons to the accuracy of facial recognition sofware are stretching things a bit. I could not find any evidence to show the points of congruence between the 2 objects, but he also found 250 points of congruence with the shroud and a 5th century painting of Jesus, as well as objects on the shroud that no one else can see.
He makes a few amazing claims in this video, it is pretty funny really.

Meet the Whangers.

 

[kuzushi]

Summary of things:
We've got a man called Jesus that virtually all scholars agree was crucified.
The Bible says that he was given a crown of thorns and speared in the side with a Roman spear.
We have an empty tomb, followers that believe he rose from the dead, and a Shroud that experts say was not done by an artist but instead portrays an actual crucifixion victim with a crown of thorns and spear wound, and which is a photographic negative with 3D information encoded into it, and there's no paint or dye in the image and no one knows how it was made.

 

[kuzushi]

This is quite interesting

 

[Blues Guitarist]

This is quite interesting

I look forward to reading a peer reviewed scientific paper on the effects of prayer.

 

[Goldstone1976]

Summary of things:
We've got a man called Jesus that virtually all scholars agree was crucified.
The Bible says that he was given a crown of thorns and speared in the side with a Roman spear.
We have an empty tomb, followers that believe he rose from the dead, and a Shroud that experts say was not done by an artist but instead portrays an actual crucifixion victim with a crown of thorns and spear wound, and which is a photographic negative with 3D information encoded into it, and there's no paint or dye in the image and no one knows how it was made.

After moving this thread to the other stuff because I thought there had been quite enough proselytising on the BB, I have continued to follow it. Not because I’m interested in the topic, but because I’m a mod of this site and I felt it still had the potential to cause issues.

Unfortunately, I have concluded that your posts have moved from stating your position to becoming designed to provoke. The post I am replying to is a case in point. There was absolutely no need to provide a summary of your position (again), yet you did.

‘Why?’, I asked myself. The conclusion I reached is that your intent at this point is simply to provoke, irritate, and/or cause unrest.

That’s trolling. Trolling isn’t tolerated on NSC.

I will issue a thread ban. Please do not create another thread to continue to proselytise.

 

[Baldseagull]

Billy Graham is in town and doing his "miracles", he gets a man with crippled legs, and a man with a terrible stammer. Sends them both behind a screen, says a prayer, and then says "John, Crippled man, throw away your crutches!" and a pair of crutches get thrown over the screen for all to see. Then he says "Steve, Stammerer, say something to us!" Steve says "H-h-h-he's f-f-f-f-allen o-over"

 

[Hugo Rune]

Who is Jordan Peterson?

Is he something to do with Groundhog Day?

He speaks a lot of bull and often starts crying when he really considers the plight of uneducated white, heterosexual men BUT he has either stolen or somehow replicated the larynx of Bob Odenkirk which makes him very difficult for me not to like.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

After moving this thread to the other stuff because I thought there had been quite enough proselytising on the BB, I have continued to follow it. Not because I’m interested in the topic, but because I’m a mod of this site and I felt it still had the potential to cause issues.

Unfortunately, I have concluded that your posts have moved from stating your position to becoming designed to provoke. The post I am replying to is a case in point. There was absolutely no need to provide a summary of your position (again), yet you did.

‘Why?’, I asked myself. The conclusion I reached is that your intent at this point is simply to provoke, irritate, and/or cause unrest.

That’s trolling. Trolling isn’t tolerated on NSC.

I will issue a thread ban. Please do not create another thread to continue to proselytise.

I wondered why it had all gone quiet…… not unwelcome