docyabut2 Posted March 23, 2019 #101 Share Posted March 23, 2019 Ok I know the Shroud was dated on the outside of a sewing, but the inside was dated with the head `s Shroud to Jesus's time, I can believe it was Jesus`s Shroud. In the Bible He did survived after his Crucifixion where two of his members, gave the roman soldiers money to his release, took him out of the tomb, where Jesus was so distorted in his injuries that his disciples couldn't recognize him, but he died and went the heaven four days not forty days after. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docyabut2 Posted March 23, 2019 #102 Share Posted March 23, 2019 (edited) oh I also believe it is Jesus's Shroud, his hair was described as short and curly, but after being held so long by the romans, his hair grew so long. Edited March 23, 2019 by docyabut2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaylemurph Posted March 23, 2019 #103 Share Posted March 23, 2019 15 minutes ago, docyabut2 said: oh I also believe it is Jesus's Shroud, his hair was described as short and curly, but after being held so long by the romans, his hair grew so long. Yeah, hair grows like that overnight. Jesus was arrested Thursday night and was dead by Friday afternoon, or do you think you know better than the Bible? —Jaylemurph 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docyabut2 Posted March 23, 2019 #104 Share Posted March 23, 2019 3 minutes ago, jaylemurph said: Yeah, hair grows like that overnight. Jesus was arrested Thursday night and was dead by Friday afternoon, or do you think you know better than the Bible? —Jaylemurph The only problem is the timings of the Bible to Jesus , like the timing of a big flood in the Bible. Adam and Eve lived 9000 years , while after the flood Abraham and Sara were only lived 150 and 90 ? the Bible has all wrong timings:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaylemurph Posted March 23, 2019 #105 Share Posted March 23, 2019 42 minutes ago, docyabut2 said: The only problem is the timings of the Bible to Jesus , like the timing of a big flood in the Bible. Adam and Eve lived 9000 years , while after the flood Abraham and Sara were only lived 150 and 90 ? the Bible has all wrong timings:) So your theory is you /do/ know better than the Gospels, which were written with a few years of the events, by eyewitnesses to the events, and generally credited as basically true by historians and archaeologists for decades? --Jaylemurph 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted March 27, 2019 #106 Share Posted March 27, 2019 On 3/22/2019 at 6:30 PM, jaylemurph said: So your theory is you /do/ know better than the Gospels, which were written with a few years of the events, by eyewitnesses to the events, and generally credited as basically true by historians and archaeologists for decades? --Jaylemurph So, you at least, are saying the Bible is believed by scholars to be generally historically correct? In a non-miraculous manner.... You're risking being tossed from the UM Bible skeptics club! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bison Posted March 27, 2019 #107 Share Posted March 27, 2019 It's usually stated that Jesus died around 30 - 36 C.E. The earliest gospel, Mark was written around 66 -70 Luke and Matthew around 85 - 90 John about 90 - 110 We see, then, that the gospels were written a generation, or two, after Jesus' death. All were written anonymously, despite the names ascribed to them. It appears that none of the writers were eyewitnesses to the events depicted in them. I don't find it too surprising that these accounts contradict each other on a number of points. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaylemurph Posted March 27, 2019 #108 Share Posted March 27, 2019 1 hour ago, bison said: It's usually stated that Jesus died around 30 - 36 C.E. The earliest gospel, Mark was written around 66 -70 Luke and Matthew around 85 - 90 John about 90 - 110 We see, then, that the gospels were written a generation, or two, after Jesus' death. All were written anonymously, despite the names ascribed to them. It appears that none of the writers were eyewitnesses to the events depicted in them. I don't find it too surprising that these accounts contradict each other on a number of points. They were never meant to be historical documents, per se. Like all of the Bible, they're propaganda. They present a certain image or scenario to a certain group of people. They were never meant to be taken together. The contradictions are literally beside the point. That said, there's no reason the rough outline of Jesus' ministry shouldn't be treated as broadly true. --Jaylemurph 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted March 27, 2019 #109 Share Posted March 27, 2019 6 hours ago, bison said: It's usually stated that Jesus died around 30 - 36 C.E. The earliest gospel, Mark was written around 66 -70 Luke and Matthew around 85 - 90 John about 90 - 110 We see, then, that the gospels were written a generation, or two, after Jesus' death. All were written anonymously, despite the names ascribed to them. It appears that none of the writers were eyewitnesses to the events depicted in them. I don't find it too surprising that these accounts contradict each other on a number of points. Mark could have been written by a living witness. The Apostiles were supposedly all young men, most (all?) not even married yet. 20 + 40 only is 60. Which... I'd agree is old for back then, but very possible. Though it is said all the Apostles (but John?) were martyred. Still, many saw Jesus and so a first generation witness would be possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esoteric_toad Posted March 27, 2019 #110 Share Posted March 27, 2019 In order for the face to be projected unto the cloth like that the person covered in the shroud would have to have a head like a minecraft character. No distortion of wrapping. That to me is the giveaway that this wasn't a burial shroud at all (of anyone). 4 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereologist Posted March 27, 2019 #111 Share Posted March 27, 2019 4 hours ago, DieChecker said: Mark could have been written by a living witness. The Apostiles were supposedly all young men, most (all?) not even married yet. 20 + 40 only is 60. Which... I'd agree is old for back then, but very possible. Though it is said all the Apostles (but John?) were martyred. Still, many saw Jesus and so a first generation witness would be possible. I don't believe that the gospels were written by the Apostles and the people they are assigned to were not all apostles. What is known is the order in which they appeared and roughly the location of where they appeared. Studies of the wording suggest 4 independent authors. The order of the stories reflects increases in detail which is what is expected in any story that is told. https://books.google.com/books/about/Who_Wrote_the_Gospels.html?id=Zt_YAAAAMAAJ Quote Nearly a century after the four Gospels were finished, Christians in the late second century, eager to give names to the anonymous manuscripts they possessed, selected traditional figures that they supposed should have written them -- the Apostles Matthew and John, Luke the "beloved physician" of Paul (Col. 4:14), and John Mark of Jerusalem, the "son" of Peter (Acts 12:12; I Peter 5:13). 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian100 Posted September 16, 2019 #112 Share Posted September 16, 2019 On 7/17/2017 at 6:55 AM, GlitterRose said: People don't want to let this go even though they can't get past the carbon dating that shows it was from the Middle Ages. It has long, long been debunked. I don't know why people need the shroud to bolster their faith. They didn't debunk anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaylemurph Posted September 16, 2019 #113 Share Posted September 16, 2019 9 hours ago, brian100 said: They didn't debunk anything. Well that brilliant riposte was certainly worth necro-posting. We don’t really just post videos here. What specific points from this video do you want to /discuss/ on this discussion forum — you can’t expect someone to slog through some random video for your pleasure. —Jaylemurph 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davros of Skaro Posted September 20, 2019 #114 Share Posted September 20, 2019 On 9/16/2019 at 10:29 AM, jaylemurph said: Well that brilliant riposte was certainly worth necro-posting. We don’t really just post videos here. What specific points from this video do you want to /discuss/ on this discussion forum — you can’t expect someone to slog through some random video for your pleasure. —Jaylemurph Be sure to bust out the 3d glasses for his reply. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now