|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 13,444 Likes: 8
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 13,444 Likes: 8 |
Raspy - " Forensic facial reconstruction (or forensic facial approximation)" Thanks, Raspy. L.W.
"Always go straight forward, and if you meet the devil, cut him in two and go between the pieces." (William Sturgis, clipper ship captain, 1830s.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,097
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,097 |
[quote=TF49]
....[quote]
That's a bit rich. The shroud came with no certificates, but you are okay with that, or even mention in the bible - you'd think that would add more credibility to the tale. The bible even says that Jesus was covered in strips of linen, with a separate cloth only covering his face, which would be normal for a Jewish burial at the time. Nothing about a bed sheet. Apologetics can do wonders , turn strips into a sheet and turn Paul into a murderer when scripture makes no such claim. It's what Xtians call the holy spirit at work..😂 TF49 is like that William Lane Craig apologist , both clam that g0d 'talks' to them.
-Bulletproof and Waterproof don't mean Idiotproof.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,287 Likes: 1
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,287 Likes: 1 |
That's embarrassing. Historians have uncovered a memorandum in 1390 by Bishop Pierre d'Arcis, stating that the shroud was a fraud and he even knew the artist and how the shroud was painted. Odd that scripture would also omit mention of such an important "historical" piece of "evidence". Irrespective, a blood stained cloth would not prove a resurrection. These days we have bleeding Mary statues - the miracles continue (well, after someone refills the statues anyway). Well, this has surfaced before. I note that you seem to take the “memo” to be legit. The document you are referring to is unsigned, undated and certainly not corroborated by other outside and independent historians. Perhaps not even written by old Pierre…..bogus, yet you put some stock in it. Would you have us believe this document should be taken with some degree of seriousness? The gospels have much more corroboration than this…… That's a bit rich. The shroud came with no certificates, but you are okay with that, or even mention in the bible - you'd think that would add more credibility to the tale. The bible even says that Jesus was covered in strips of linen, with a separate cloth only covering his face, which would be normal for a Jewish burial at the time. Nothing about a bed sheet. You seem to have a comprehension issue…. What is a “bit rich?” I was not defending the shroud at all…. As usual, you missed the point.
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,287 Likes: 1
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,287 Likes: 1 |
[quote=mauserand9mm][quote=TF49] .... That's a bit rich. The shroud came with no certificates, but you are okay with that, or even mention in the bible - you'd think that would add more credibility to the tale. The bible even says that Jesus was covered in strips of linen, with a separate cloth only covering his face, which would be normal for a Jewish burial at the time. Nothing about a bed sheet. Apologetics can do wonders , turn strips into a sheet and turn Paul into a murderer when scripture makes no such claim. It's what Xtians call the holy spirit at work..😂 TF49 is like that William Lane Craig apologist , both clam that g0d 'talks' to them. You and Mman are quite a bit alike. Both of you missed the point….. or maybe you two just dummy up or attempt to divert to some other topic when your postings are shown to be deficient. Both of you just did that. A signal of retreat. So, both of you…. Tell me why this spurious doc falsely attributed to Pierre dArcy should be given any mention at all?
Last edited by TF49; 01/31/23.
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,097
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,097 |
Re: Falsely attributed
You mean like how Xtians falsely attribute the synoptic
gospels to actual disciples Mark, Matthew ,Luke , ?
And how Xtians make the false claim that scripture
provides first-hand eyewitness account of Jesus miracles?
-Bulletproof and Waterproof don't mean Idiotproof.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,312
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,312 |
The facts are simple, Christianity as with any other religion, rests on faith. Religion is a matter of faith, not facts, science or philosophical inquiry... belief in science isnt an act of faith? seriously?
.... like tears in the rain
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 24,701 Likes: 47
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 24,701 Likes: 47 |
[quote=mauserand9mm][quote=TF49] .... That's a bit rich. The shroud came with no certificates, but you are okay with that, or even mention in the bible - you'd think that would add more credibility to the tale. The bible even says that Jesus was covered in strips of linen, with a separate cloth only covering his face, which would be normal for a Jewish burial at the time. Nothing about a bed sheet. Apologetics can do wonders , turn strips into a sheet and turn Paul into a murderer when scripture makes no such claim. It's what Xtians call the holy spirit at work..😂 TF49 is like that William Lane Craig apologist , both clam that g0d 'talks' to them. Just a thought for anyone but Starman. Look at his history of posting on the Campfire. I went back 10 pages before I got tired of looking. 80% of his posts are bashing religion, one way or another. Just a thought for Starman, you need help, and you won’t admit it. It is obvious that your lamp is empty. You have to be sick to get so much pleasure to try and upset so many people for so long…
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/63b8KsVp/DSCN4329.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 18,592 Likes: 18
Campfire Ranger
|
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 18,592 Likes: 18 |
Every day on this side of the ground is a win.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 14,789 Likes: 5
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 14,789 Likes: 5 |
That's embarrassing. Historians have uncovered a memorandum in 1390 by Bishop Pierre d'Arcis, stating that the shroud was a fraud and he even knew the artist and how the shroud was painted. Odd that scripture would also omit mention of such an important "historical" piece of "evidence". Irrespective, a blood stained cloth would not prove a resurrection. It's not paint and there's not an artist out there that has been able to reproduce it. Never said it was paint. You can paint with various fluids. Of course it can be easily reproduced, just not by removing a corpse from a cross and placing it on a sheet. The original fake looks nothing like Jesus anyway: If it wasn't paint, what is it? And who can reproduce it? If it's easy, someone would do it. You know what Jesus looked like? How?
Last edited by Tyrone; 01/31/23.
Politics is War by Other Means
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,312
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,312 |
What "Starman" posts here doesnt effect my beliefs one way or another.
I support/respect his (or her) right to his (or her) opinion.
I have learned from responses to his (or her) posts ,things that I wouldnt have otherwise , had he (or she) not posted.
We should consider him (or her) a gift.
Our creators blessings upon him (or her).
.... like tears in the rain
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,698 Likes: 1
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,698 Likes: 1 |
Regarding the OP, do any of you men think that the behavior of some of those within the church (the body of believers)…either individually or collectively…or the behavior of some of the entities within the church…either individual churches themselves, or certain denominations (for example)…is a stumbling block for some people coming to the faith of Christianity and for some people walking away from it…? Without a doubt. If one thinks that church is for righteous people only, one will stay away, thinking he/she is not good enough to be there. If one believes that it should be made up of righteous people and one knows that less-than-righteous folk are there, then he/she says away because of the "hypocrisy" of it. I expect that a lot of people from both camps use these excuses to have themselves a second Saturday. Oh, and then they don't have to put anything into the church coffers either.
The biggest problem our country has is not systemic racism, it's systemic stupidity.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,410
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,410 |
What "Starman" posts here doesnt effect my beliefs one way or another.
I support/respect his (or her) right to his (or her) opinion.
I have learned from responses to his (or her) posts ,things that I wouldnt have otherwise , had he (or she) not posted.
We should consider him (or her) a gift.
Our creators blessings upon him (or her). Well said...
Illegitimi non carborundum
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,410
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,410 |
[quote=mauserand9mm][quote=TF49] .... That's a bit rich. The shroud came with no certificates, but you are okay with that, or even mention in the bible - you'd think that would add more credibility to the tale. The bible even says that Jesus was covered in strips of linen, with a separate cloth only covering his face, which would be normal for a Jewish burial at the time. Nothing about a bed sheet. Apologetics can do wonders , turn strips into a sheet and turn Paul into a murderer when scripture makes no such claim. It's what Xtians call the holy spirit at work..😂 TF49 is like that William Lane Craig apologist , both clam that g0d 'talks' to them. You and Mman are quite a bit alike. Both of you missed the point….. or maybe you two just dummy up or attempt to divert to some other topic when your postings are shown to be deficient. Both of you just did that. A signal of retreat. So, both of you…. Tell me why this spurious doc falsely attributed to Pierre dArcy should be given any mention at all? There is little question among those familiar with the topic that the biggest mistake ever made in carbon 14 dating was the Shroud of Turin. Sadly, this mistake will be understood by some as meaning that carbon 14 dating is prone to error, subject to unexplainable anomalies or plagued by problems of contamination; none of which is true. Let's be perfectly clear: carbon 14 dating is an excellent and very accurate scientific method for determining the age of many things as old as 50,000 years. The failure to obtain a reliable date for the Shroud of Turin is not about flaws in carbon 14 dating methods or contamination. It is not about the problems, so often discussed in the media, of mysterious biological polymers growing on the cloth's fibers or new carbon introduced into the Shroud's cloth by a scorching fire in 1532. It is not about the sloppy work by three very prestigious carbon 14 dating laboratories. And it is not, as some suggest, about conspiracies dreamed up to prove religious or anti-religious arguments (the Shroud is a religious object for some). It is about a stupid mistake...Let me illustrate: Recently I sent a soil sample to a testing laboratory to find out why my lawn was doing so poorly. The lab reported back that the soil was perfect for grass. It had the right nutrients and the pH was right on target, neither too acidic or alkaline. I didn't think so. What had gone wrong? It turns out that a few weeks earlier I had repaired a spot in my lawn where my dog had peed and killed the grass. I dug out a small section of soil and filled the hole with loam I had purchased from a garden supply store. Without realizing it, I had taken a sample for testing from that repaired area. The sample was not representative of my lawn. It was chemically unlike the rest of my lawn. The lab had perfectly analyzed an invalid sample. Similarly, as we now know, from National Geographic News, PBS and several scientific papers, that the carbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin was done with an invalid sample. M. Sue Benford and Joseph G. Marino, with the help of several textile experts, undertook a detailed examination of the documentation photographs of the carbon 14 samples and identified clear indications of a medieval patch. Independently, Ray Rogers, a Fellow of the University of California, Los Alamos National Laboratory and a charter member of the Coalition for Excellence in Science Education has examined actual threads and fibers adjacent to where the samples were snipped. In a paper he published with Anna Arnoldi of the University of Milan, Rogers reported finding indisputable chemical evidence of a repair patch. He found dyestuff and spliced threads. Others, using scanning electronic microscopes and advanced spectral analysis tools have confirmed his findings. This mistake of using an invalid sample should not be allowed to tarnish the reputation of carbon 14 dating. Unfortunately, we live in a world of easy and careless polemics. There are some, as well, who because of religious convictions cannot accept the conclusions of carbon 14 dating. Scientists cannot properly challenge matters of faith on the basis of science alone. But it would be unfortunate if those who hold certain beliefs use an erroneous understanding about carbon 14 dating to challenge carbon 14 dating when it is not carbon 14 dating that is at fault. The mistake must now be openly admitted in the interest of scientific integrity. It was a careless mistake, a stupid mistake, a foolish mistake. Carbon 14 dating is an invaluable tool for archeology and science. The mistake made in dating the Shroud of Turin does not diminish this fact. by Raymond N. Rogers and Anna Arnoldi
Illegitimi non carborundum
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 54
Campfire Greenhorn
|
|
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 54 |
I think Christians' hypocrisy in accepting homosexuality and other things might be to blame.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 14,789 Likes: 5
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 14,789 Likes: 5 |
The early, erroneous Carbon-14 dating of the Shroud used materials nuns sewed into the Shroud to repair damage from the fire.
Politics is War by Other Means
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,601 Likes: 4
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,601 Likes: 4 |
What "Starman" posts here doesnt effect my beliefs one way or another.
I support/respect his (or her) right to his (or her) opinion.
I have learned from responses to his (or her) posts ,things that I wouldnt have otherwise , had he (or she) not posted.
We should consider him (or her) a gift.
Our creators blessings upon him (or her). Now that was well said. Very impressive.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,097
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,097 |
What "Starman" posts here doesnt effect my beliefs one way or another.
. Children also keep believing in Santa and his flying sleigh. BTW; What was your position on 'Miracle on the Hudson'?
-Bulletproof and Waterproof don't mean Idiotproof.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 14,789 Likes: 5
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 14,789 Likes: 5 |
BTW; What was your position on 'Miracle on the Hudson'? I would consider it a miracle, but the Catholic Church wouldn't. Here's what it takes to be considered miraculous: https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/what-constitutes-a-miracle
Politics is War by Other Means
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,097
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,097 |
BTW; What was your position on 'Miracle on the Hudson'? I would consider it a miracle, .. Prof.pilots around the globe and the NTSB don't. And neither does Airbus. Feel free to present your case.
-Bulletproof and Waterproof don't mean Idiotproof.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,097
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,097 |
renegade50 is a pretty good judge of character. You need to address your apologetics and who you cite to support such.( re: Ehrman). Bart Ehrman does not support the arguments you make, on the contrary he refutes them.
-Bulletproof and Waterproof don't mean Idiotproof.
|
|
|
|
|
545 members (222Sako, 24HourCampFireGuy50, 10ring1, 1234, 160user, 1lessdog, 69 invisible),
2,445
guests, and
1,185
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,194,577
Posts18,532,148
Members74,041
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
