Did Jesus create a new religion? (Christianity)

>>981654
No. Paul did.

None of them. Christianity arose after his death and was spread by the apostles. >>981654

We need to define ''religion''.

File: 1395398874880.png (281KB, 2822x2500px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 2822x2500px

>>981654
No Christianity is just a continued version of Judaism, which existed since the creation of man.

>>981684
>which existed since the creation of man.
...uh huh...

>le christianity is not a religion meme

This >>981666

Matthew 16:18 "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (KJV) is pretty much all you need.

The gnostics, early followers of the Jesus figure (whether or not he "actually" existed is both moot and irrelevant), created the first-century media buzz required to threaten the Roman hegemony enough to be persecuted (requiring secret symbols like the Icthus), then the gospels were developed (read Elaine Pagels' "The Gnostic Gospels"), and Matthew wrote the bit about Peter (note the Aramaic name was "Kaypha," the name "Peter" being derived from the Greek root "petra," or "rock," and the Catholic church was all "dibs!"

If they hadn't have made that deal with Constantine in the fourth century, allowing its establishment as the "religion of power," Christianity would likely be one of the many belief structures that grew and dissipated.

The problem with looking for bible verses that show the spreading of Christianity is that the New Testament was specifically organized and edited to present it as the fulfillment of the prophecies of the OT, thus not really requiring much in the way of proselytizing.

tl;dr: NT ret-conned OT prophecy, using Gnostic texts to legitimize their version of the messiah.

File: 1396657017659.png (217KB, 400x490px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 400x490px

>>981684
Don't shitpost with my waifu please

>>981684
Christianity is about 400 years older than Judaism. Surely you mean ancient Hebrews, and even they are different from modern Jews.


>>981735
This post is so wrong...


>Matthew 16:18 "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (KJV) is pretty much all you need

For one....no. This verse is commonly used by Catholics to support the idea of a universal church. It was far from the mind of Jesus to establish any sort of church or political body.
> created the first-century media buzz required to threaten the Roman hegemony enough to be persecuted
Nope. There were many religions. Roman persecuted many religions. Christianity was no "threat" to the Roman hegemony. Source: Edward Gibbon, "The Fall of the Roman Empire"
>If they hadn't have made that deal with Constantine in the fourth century, allowing its establishment as the "religion of power,"

By Constantine's time, Christianity was wide spread

>>981735
>whether or not he "actually" existed
Stop this meme.

http://storage.cloversites.com/fcfgroups/documents/Why%20We%20Believe%207.pdf

>>981786
>Christianity is about 400 years older than Judaism
????

>>981792
Many Christians think that Rabbinical Judaism is an entirely different beast than Judaism was before.

>>981735
>the New Testament was specifically organized and edited to present it as the fulfillment of the prophecies of the OT
Can I get a Christian's thoughts on this?

>>981792


Judaism pretty much has the same right of lineage to Abraham as Christianity.
King David, Jacob, Adam, Abraham, etc etc...didn't wear a yamaka,had no bar mitzavah, didn't light candles on Hanaka

Rabbinic Judaism has been the he mainstream form of Judaism since 600 AD


>>981802
King David, Jacob, Adam, Abraham, etc etc...didn't wear a yamaka,had no bar mitzavah, didn't light candles on Hanaka...there was no "Star of David"

>>981810
The New Testament was specifically organized and edited to present it as the fulfillment of the prophecies of the OT

That's about it
Christians believe those are true and live by that
The character of Jesus is central to Christian lifestyle

>>981810
The poster is very confused it seems. The post is kind of on the right track. "Specifically"? No. The majority of the New Testament is written to explain how to be a Christian.

Did the writers of the Gospels write a bit to clarify prophecies in the Old Testament? Yes.

>>981820
>Christians believe those are true and live by that

Nope

>>981825
Christians don't believe Jesus came to fulfill the OT? Are you sure about that?

>>981827
That's not what you said.

You said: The New Testament was specifically organized and edited to present it as the fulfillment of the prophecies of the OT

>>981811
Go on...

>>981838
That poster obviously just meant the gospels, not all of the NT. I was just quoting him.

How sinful is a pretentious protestant member of the Klu Klux Klan with feelings of superiority who enjoys lynching blacks?

>>981843
rereading it, I see he meant that Christians believe the prophecies, which is true. Depending on who you ask, some do and some don't. Some early Protestant agreed that the Biblical miracles were exaggerated

>>981852
I said ''Go on...'' so he could tell more about early Judaism, its links with Christianity and differences with modern Judaism.

File: 1377429095493.jpg (80KB, 403x403px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 403x403px

>>981851
1/10 of sinful
Remove mark of Cain immediately

>>981866
t. proddy

>>981860
>>981852
Meant to reply to the post below yours,. I'm the same guy anyways. That's pretty much it. There was a Semitic race called the Hebrews that lived in the general area of what is now known as Israel. Archeologically evidence from the ancient times is sketchy, but there is evidence for some minor kingdoms that existed for millenniums. Then the Romans came in


The Romans called these guys Judeans, which is the etymology origin of the term "Jew". It was during Roman times that Abraham, previously called a Hebrew, became called a Jew.

I really think we can logic this out. Like, everyone recognizes that the messianic prophecies were fully known in the first century Common Era (yes, I'm using it, get over it). Assume for a moment that someone *literally* fulfilled *all* those prophecies to the point where it was obvious that he was the messiah. How likely is it that there would be THREE HUNDRED YEARS before we see this being said in texts, not to mention by four people WHOSE STORIES DON'T EVEN MATCH UP IN EVERY DETAIL?!
... Okay, I'm sorry for shouting there. I just get angry sometimes. But seriously. I mean, seriously. Basic logic. Some talk around that detail and hem and haw, but it's usually just blithely ignored, and it's like... just think about it.

>>981654
>Matthew 8:5 When he entered Capernaum, a centurion approached him and appealed to him, 6 saying, “Lord, my servant is lying at home paralyzed, suffering dreadfully.” 7 He said to him, “I will come and cure him.” 8 The centurion said in reply, “Lord, I am not worthy to have you enter under my roof; only say the word and my servant will be healed. 9 For I too am a person subject to authority, with soldiers subject to me. And I say to one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and to another, ‘Come here,’ and he comes; and to my slave, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.” 10 When Jesus heard this, he was amazed and said to those following him, “Amen, I say to you, in no one in Israel have I found such faith. 11 I say to you, many will come from the east and the west, and will recline with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob at the banquet in the kingdom of heaven, 12 but the children of the kingdom will be driven out into the outer darkness, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.”

>Matthew 23:37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how many times I yearned to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her young under her wings, but you were unwilling! 38 Behold, your house will be abandoned, desolate. 39 I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’”

Jesus clearly threw the Jews under the bus.

How does the Bible describe Heaven? Is it really as simple as it sounds? By that I mean stuff like
>>981882
>will recline with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob at the banquet

>>981882
>a centurion going to jesus

>>981891
The most common description is the "Land of Milk and Honey," which pretty much reflects the commodities that had cultural value at the time, because if the best thing you can come up with is milk and honey, then like you've clearly never had Dim Sum.

>>981891
It's ironic. For something that is rarely described or mentioned in the Bible, it plays a major role in the though of a Christian.

Heaven is rarely described. Hell is not described at all.

Revelation is a tricky book. That is where most of Heaven is described. However, the authenticity of Revelations is not as strong.

So, let's focus on the Gospels and Paul.


Here's where it gets more mystic and philosophical: Heaven is Jesus. Through Jesus, one can find eternal life. So, Heaven is living forever. None of us can tell you anymore, since we have never died.


I said earlier that Hell is not a place. All the caricatures of Hell (satan with horns, fire everywhere) are just artist representation. Hell in the Biblical sense is eternal death.

File: 1460535716509.jpg (65KB, 460x620px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 460x620px

usurper !!!!

>>981906
The Orthodox say that "Hell" is where God is. To clarify, it means that everybody ends up in the same place. The presence of God is a punishment in itself for some, and it is also a great reward in itself for others.

>>981906
>Hell in the Biblical sense is eternal death
spiritually dead atheists on suicide watch

>>981787
None of that proves anything,

>>981654
from a different thread

All religions, from "religio", are systems of bondage. Lists of things to do in order to cleanse yourself, enlighten yourself, improve yourself, until you can reach up and be like God. It's what the devil told Eve; eat the fruit, know good and evil, and you will be like God.

Every man-made religion attempts to reach up to God, or elevate man up to God, and they all fail. Each and every one of them. While they do in fact enslave the people who subscribe to their beliefs, these systems of bondage are ultimately lies.

Becoming a Christian is not subscribing to a new philosophy, a new way to cleanse oneself of impurities or imperfections, or a new way to reach up to God.

It is God coming down to earth, accepting us for what we are, fallen sinners, and redeeming us by His blood, justifying us through our faith in Him, and resurrecting us to eternal life.

At the point a person becomes a Christian, they change from a spiritually dead human being in the image of Adam and Eve into a spiritually alive new creation in Christ Jesus, in the image of Christ Jesus Himself. It is a permanent transformation in this church age. The old person dies, and a new creature is born. Hence "born again" in the Spirit, after being born in water.

Once that transformation happens, a person is free. Free from religion. Free from all laws. Free from sin, from death, from the curse, from morality.

He who the Son sets free, is free indeed.

The opposite of religion.

>>981735
>The gnostics, early followers of the Jesus

Lying sack of shit spotted.

>>981810

The Old Testament contains hundreds of messianic prophecies; things the messiah was going to be, do, say, act, etc.

What was hidden in the Old Testament was revealed in the New Testament, when Jesus fulfilled all of the messianic prophecies that were ripe, and then some.

Jews whine because the Kingdom Age messianic prophecies were not fulfilled in Jesus' time, but that had something to do with them putting Him on a cross, and not on a throne.

People who do not believe in God, and do not believe in prophecy, when confronted with hundreds of fulfilled prophecies, have to say something. So they do what they do best. They lie and say it was all retconned.

>>981787
>"Evidence" from Tacitus

Dropped, I already know what quote they're using and it proves nothing

>>981851
If he's a christian, his sins are forgiven, and forgotten, and the one unpardonable sin, unbelief, is not a problem for him.

He also only exists in your imagination.

>>981872
The word Jew is in the bible dozens of times prior to the Roman Empire existing. Your semantic bullshit is tiresome.

>>983564
How convenient for you to be able to erase evidence, and then whine that there isn't enough evidence for you to believe.

>>981658
Fpbp

>>981684
you misspelled Islam tbqh

>Christcucks think Tacitus' quote proves their religion right

All Tacitus does is tell of what Christians believe in, to his knowledge. He never claims it is accurate, and even if he had, he would not be accurate, since he came a full century after the supposed ministry/death of Jesus To claim his quote "verifies" the Christian religion is the equivalent of saying the Maya gods are real because I posted in the Mesoamerican thread last week and made a comment about the gods the Maya venerated.

Christcucks are stupid.

>>983587
>Christcucks are stupid.
news at 11

>>983587
>Tacitus' quote proves their religion right
It's evidence for Jesus from a non-Christian source you dipshit.

>>983587
>There's nothing outside the bible!

39 extra-biblical sources

>They don't prove anything!

>>983608
>It's evidence for Jesus
No its not, its a guy talking about what christcucks believe.

>>983620
"Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of . . . Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome. . . ."

Tacitus, Annals 15.44

Yes, that's what Christians believe. The truth.

>>983620
Rome's greatest historian, writing about a homeless itinerant Jewish rabbi executed most shamefully.

And you never, not once, wonder why.

>atheists
ewww don't talk to me and don't come near me

>>983574
All Tacitus proves is that there were Christians who believed what they did at the time he was writing what he was.

>>983638
Kill yourself.

>>983638
seriously atheists should be round up in to camps

>>983990
Why don't you fight me nigga

>>983627
Original source document actually does not refer to Christus unambiguously.

Chrstus is the word used and because the source document has evidence of the 'i' in Christians having previously been an 'e' Tacitus' value is diminished.

Also 8th century copy from Christians.
There are also no quotations by others of the relevant passage to confirm the integrity of text over time.

>>983990
>He believes in a personal god
topkek

>>984020
>The followers of Crustus have once again refused to work on Saturn's day, citing the second coming of Pizza Hut (tm)'s five dollar deluxe cheese-filled crust pizza(c) as their reason.

>>984033
>like some primitive animal he believes that the physical world is all there is
>he also believes that consciousness is physical and that the Big Bang came outta nowhere
>''dude I'm so enlightened and rational lmao''
hahahahaha oh wow that's very cringeworthy

>>984112
>he thinks he has to be a materialist to be an atheist
>he believes in a personal god
>he doesn't see the overwhelming evidence of consciousness being dictated by biology
>he thinks the belief/nonbelief in consciousness, metaphysical reality, or science necessarily has anything to do with atheism
>STILL using the "everything came from nothing" strawman
topkek

>>981654
Saying Christianity is Judaism is the same as saying Sikhism and Buddhism are Hinduism. Just saying.

>>984141
>he literally believes that there was a random explosion out of nothing and billions of years later here we are with our consciousness
just lol

File: 1451705712574.png (3KB, 442x350px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 442x350px

>>984167
>STILL using the strawman
>thinking there can ever be nothing
>not understanding the big bang
>going off the false and unfounded assumption that only consciousness can create consciousness
topkek

>>984167
The Big Bang wasn't an explosion, it was an expansion.

Shows how stupid you are.

>>984210
>"bang"
>no explosion
Bazinga

>>984195
>>984210
>DUDE OUT OF NOTHING STUFF MAGICALLY APPEARED AND STARTED EXPANDING AND HERE WE ARE TODAY WITH OUR CONSCIOUSNESS LMAO
Anons, I...

>>984215
the big bang is literally just the >holy >roman >empire of physics. It wasn't big and it wasn't a bang
>>984220
>this strawman
>again

>>984215
You're joking, right?

>>984224
I am joking. That was literally a joke.

>>984223
>>984220

>>984240
>this strawman
>again

>It's a "theists think all atheists believe everything came from nothing" episode

>>984253
>>984244
>if I keep calling it a strawman that'll help me avoid explaining my illogical belief that the universe and all its contents is the product of a BIG coincidence and that consciousness is nothing special :^)
lel

File: 1457980523253.jpg (389KB, 1500x1125px) Image search: [Google]

389KB, 1500x1125px

>>981654
The original version of Christianity saw itself not as a new religion but as an extension of Judaism. Jesus was a new prophet in a long line of Jewish prophets, all the old Jewish laws were still in effect.

Paul came along and announced Jesus had actually made something completly different and the Jewish laws are dead. The current Gospels we have were written to support Paul's idea. The Gospels that were banned and declared heretic didn't.

So in a way our modern Christianity owes more to Paul than Jesus

>>984303
>this strawman STILL
>STILL doesn't get that deity nonbelief does not entail believing everything came from nothing
>He doesn't understand that the reason he thinks consciousness is special is because he has a consciousness
wew. cults, not even once

>>984311
>le Paul ruined Christianity meme

Paul's epistles are the oldest things on the New Testament. How do you know they're not the correct depiction of what early Christianity was like? There's no genuine evidence that Paul drastically altered the direction of the religion.

>>984324
>I don't believe that God created the Universe, I believe that the Universe created itself, you see, I don't actually believe that everything came from nothing because that nothing created itself :^)
top lel

>>984345
Where did god come from?

>>984345
>he can only think in terms of "creating" even though "creating" is a human concept
>he STILL thinks the concept of total nothing is possible
haha oh boy

>>984353
God is God.

>>984361
weak bait

>>984378
you can call my post bait, but you still believe in a personal god tho

>>984378
how "god being god, eternal, emanating from himself etc. etc." is any less ridiculous than the concept of the universe coming from nothing that you mock?

File: 02_001.png (36KB, 128x128px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 128x128px

>>984341
>Paul's epistles are the oldest things on the New Testament.
Duh because everything in the old testament other than Paul was derivative of him?

>How do you know they're not the correct depiction of what early Christianity was like?
How about the fact that he never knew Jesus? How about the fact that 1st and 2nd Peter are both written by different people, neither of whom are Peter? How about a fact that the historical Peter and James (who both knew Jesus) accused Paul of being a fraud? How about the fact that the church James found, the Ebionetes, were declared heretics by Paul's men and had most of their gospels destroyed?

The bible conists of 50% Paul, and the rest consist of fraudulent Gospels which if not heavily edited are outright frauds.

File: stock-photo-72608007.jpg (1MB, 2048x1371px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1371px

>>984386
Yes, I believe in God.

As for you, you have the primitive mind of an animal who believes that the physical world is all there is. I feel sorry for nihilistic pretentious atheists like yourself who are just one little step above solipsism. I used to be exactly like you. I eventually grew out of atheism. You too maybe will one day.

Just remember though that without religion there would be no civilization and that you are literally leeching off culture greated by godly men. Laws, science, architecture, artwork, music, etc. are the works of godly men. So remember that Mr. ''haha lol religious people are like so stupid and delusional lol they're not le rational, enlightened and rebellious like me xD''.

>>984424
>>As for you, you have the primitive mind of an animal who believes that the physical world is all there is.
I never said the physical world is all there is, though.
>I feel sorry for nihilistic pretentious atheists like yourself who are just one little step above solipsism.
I feel sorry for you, believing in a thing that's highly unlikely.
>I used to be exactly like you.
And I used to be like you. Theism is harder to convert out of than atheism because the human mind likes religion more, even though it's irrational.
>Just remember though that without religion there would be no civilization
I accept that. Still doesn't make it true, unfortunately, and it will never make it true. We could have easily had the same society today if we found a way to be "religious" without literally believing the things were true. Unfortunately, rationality isn't necessary for survival, which is why irrationality still exists.

>>984412
This

>>984424
And also this

>>984444
>We could have easily had the same society today if we found a way to be "religious" without literally believing the things were true
Kidding?

what a waste of quads

>>984452
No.

>>984457
Then you're clueless. I bet you still think that the polytheist greeks and romans ''didn't really believe''.

Pro tip: they actually did

>>984460
>Then you're clueless
Your judgement, which I don't care about.
>I bet you still think that the polytheist greeks and romans ''didn't really believe''.
No.

File: Iesus Nazarenus.jpg (152KB, 485x600px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 485x600px

>>984467
May God have mercy on your soul.

>>984460
And don't be an idiot, I know we could have never found a way. The human mind doesn't work like that; we for some reason have to actually believe the supernatural claims. But if the human mind didn't work that way.
>>984481
The fact that you think God can have mercy proves how ridiculous a concept like God is.

>>984487
>But if the human mind didn't work that way.
Meant to finish this. If it didn't work that way, we could have the same society.

>>984353
God is an eternal spirit being. He has always existed, exists, and will always exist.

>>983919
Yup. Proves that definitively.

>>984020
Weird how you think that matters.

>>984210
It wasn't anything. It's a hoax.

>>984520
No it's not.

>>984311
So, you believe that Jesus did not institute a new covenant as Paul said He would. In Jerusalem, in Judea, no new covenant.

No new covenant, no, not at all.

A New Covenant
31 “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— 32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them,[a] says the Lord. 33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”

>>984524
The Universe was created and God is its creator by definition.

>>984404
Because the universe is made up of matter and is not at heat death. It is not eternal. If the universe were eternal, all of the stars would be burned out.

God is a spirit being, and is not subject to entropy.

>>984531
Probably not

>>984529
Not him, but how does new covenant = entirely new theology?

>>984529

Well, let's see, people don't instinctively know Christianity, it's not with the house of Israel, but rather everyone, and I don't see anything in there about actually changing what the laws are.

So you know, basically nothing like what Jeremiah is talking about. Try again, Christcuck.

>>984412
So, so evil. So, so catholic. So, so homosexual.

>>984524
Dude, you actually believe that everything in the universe, everything, all of the stars, all of the planets, all of the asteroids, all of the comets, all of the moons, absolutely everything, used to fit in the head of a pin.

>>984538
Because the new covenant has new parties and new conditions and new benefits and new costs.

>>984555
Atoms, if they were scaled up to the size of a football field, would have its nucleus the size of a nickel. And you would barely be able to even see the electrons

>>983547
I was born again before I knew what any of this meant, and now I scoff at it. What happens to me?

File: 1460415515834.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>984537
The creator is God by definition and the Universe was created since it had a beginning. What don't you understand? Stop this atheist nonsense, deep down you know that there is more than the physical world, stop ignoring God.

Btw, were you a proddy or Catholic before your spirit became a victim of atheism?

>>984542
Wow, you can't even pretend to understand the new covenant from the outside. I keep forgetting that.

I don't have to tell my brother in Christ what Jesus is like. He knows. The Spirit in me is the Spirit in him.

Our sins are forgiven.

It was offered to the House of Israel for 40 days after the resurrection, and they rejected it. Even then, there was always a way for people to enter into the Old Covenant as well as the New Covenant, even if they weren't Jews.

Everyone in the New Covenant is dead to the Law, and the Law does not chase dead men.

So no, I understand my God, and you haven't the slightest idea. Most of these people are lost. You're running the wrong way without a compass.

>>984567
So do that for 10^258 atoms.

>>984568
How did you become a born again Christian?

>>984567
Not him but where did atoms come from? You know who's responsible for all things in the Universe, stop lying to yourself, it's God Almighty.

>>984569
>What don't you understand?
What don't you understand? You've been explained this before, I can tell by your style of writing. You have learn the definition of "create" in the sense of "intentionally making manifest". The key idea here is intention.
>Stop this atheist nonsense, deep down you know that there is more than the physical world, stop ignoring God.
I'm tired of this argument.
> before your spirit became a victim of atheism?
I was a Catholic when I was like 11 I think

>>984570

So Christianity is correct because you feel it's correct.

I feel that atheism is correct. I guess atheism is correct.

And back when worshipping the Olympiad deities was in vogue, all those people who felt the hand of Zeus protecting them, or Poseidon watching over them on the water, they were all right too!

>>984574
Atoms are made up of smaller particles.
>>984577
There is no "where" if the universe is everywhere.
>who's
I cringe every time you don't see it.

>>984560
Yeah, but it can't change the reality of things. Judaism was non-Trinitarian, and Christianity is Trinitarian. What's up with that?

File: Pieter de Grebber -- God Inviting Christ to Sit on the Throne at His Right Hand (1645).jpg (132KB, 1153x1001px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1153x1001px

>>984582
>I'm tired of this argument.
God is not tired.
>I was a Catholic
Come back home.

>>984584
Christianity is correct because Jesus really is God, and He really did raise from the dead.

Has nothing to do with me whatsoever; I'm just here telling you the truth matters.

Your atheism rankles within you, because you know it's false. It's just also easy.

>>984595
>God is not tired.
God was tired when he rested apparently.
>Come back home.
I'm not interested in the cult anymore.

>>984588
Can you even begin to fathom 10^258?

No, no you cannot.

>>984599
>Jesus really is God, and He really did raise from the dead
I actually heard he didn't do that.

>>984603
Where are you even getting that number and what are you using it for? Are you implying there's that many atoms?

>>984601
>he still takes all the stories of the Old Testament literally
I see that the issue is Biblical illiteracy.

>>984612
Well there are /his/ anons that say I should, so

>>984599
>Christianity is correct because Jesus really is God, and He really did raise from the dead.


[citation seriously needed]

Especially when you have to contort your own holy books to make them say things that aren't actually in the text to make them "prove" the divinity of Jesus. An omnibenevolent, omniscient, omnipotent deity would run a tighter ship, or so you'd think.

It's not the truth, it's a delusion that you've latched onto, probably in a moment of personal crisis.

Honestly, while I don't believe there is a god out there, I'm open to the possibility; but the odds of the Christian deity being correct and actually running the universe are so astronomically low that it's kind of funny.

>>984592
There are hints in Judaism that God is a triune being; the use of the word Elohim, for instance, while maybe not used for this purpose, is a plural word used in the singular sense. So is trinity; a plural word used in a singular sense.

And Elohim made man, a being composed of a triunity --- body, soul and spirit, in the image of God.

Come near unto me. hear this: I have not spoken in secret from the beginning: from the time that it was,there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me.
Isaiah 48:16

God and Spirit, and God is One.

I will declare the decree: The LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son:
this day have I begotten thee. Psalm 2:7

Father and Son. One God.

Exodus 19 starts with the words, "In the third month." This is explained by the words of Proverbs 22:20, "Have I not written to thee excellent (Hebrew, threefold) things in counsels and knowledge." On this Rabbi Joshua bar Nehemiah said that this is the Torah whose letters are threefold, alf, bet, g(i)ml, and everything is a Trinity: The Torah is Trinitarian, for it is composed of the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings. The Mishna (talmudical learning) is a trinity composed of Talmud (learning) halakhot (daily Jewish laws) and haggadot (historical items). The mediator consisted of a trinity of Miriam, Moses, & Aaron. Prayers are a trinity of morning, afternoon, and evening prayers. Israel is a trinity consisting of priests, Levites and Israelites. The name Moses in Hebrew consists of three letters. He is of the tribe of Levi, which again is in the Hebrew three letters. from the seed of the Patriarchs who are a trinity of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; in the third month which is Sivan, after Nisan & Iyar on mount Sin whose letters are three as it is written. "And they rested in the wilderness of Sin.".(Midrash Tanhuma on Exodus 19)

Trinity. Trinity errywhere.

>>984601
Good for you. Never let a man get between you and your God again.

>>984636
I don't have a deity though

>>984610
Do the math. Put 10^258 atoms into the head of a pin.

Then wonder how it "exploded".

Then wonder how it escaped its own gravity well.

Then wonder where the pin came from.

>>984633
whoa there's three empty beer cans on my desk.
>fall on my knees and pray

>>984618
It's a very tight ship. And when the complement is full, we sail.

>>984412
Nothing in your post has actually refuted anything I've said. Are you saying there are Christian works we know of older than Paul's epistles, which are from the 50s AD? What are they?

>>984640
Oops, my bad.

Never let a man get between you and your Maker.

>>984656
>Never let a man get between you and your Maker.
A Maker implies a Maker with an intention, which I think is silly, though
>>984645
>Put 10^258 atoms into the head of a pin.
But why would I when there's not that many atoms? Again, where are you getting that number and why?
>Then wonder how it "exploded".
Who said it "exploded"?
>Then wonder how it escaped its own gravity well.
I'm not a physicist, but I gather it has something to do with escape speeds.
>Then wonder where the pin came from.
Where else can it be, again, if the universe is literally everywhere?

>>984661

Do you really think he has the degree of reading comprehension necessary to understand your points?

>>984671
Probably not. I keep not learning my lesson.

>>984661
Yes, you were made with an intention in mind; to house the Holy Spirit of God and live with God forever.

Then do it for 10^80 atoms.

"The Big Bang" at least infers an explosion.

Escape speeds of an infinite gravity well are infinite.

There was no pin. The pin is a lie.

>>984676
he's a troll.
right now christian theologians are jumping on the fact that the big bang occurred in the past - trying to warp it into evidence for a diety. it's very en vogue among everyone but biblical literalists.

>>984689
It was begun by religious people you nitwit. Catholics are technically religious people.

>>984694
no that's historical revision.

>>984700
Literally started by Catholic priests.


Georges Lemaître, (1894-1966), Belgian cosmologist, Catholic priest, and father of the Big Bang theory.

>>984686
>Yes, you were made with an intention in mind;
And that's why God is ridiculous. You'll never understand why though.
>Then do it for 10^80 atoms.
It would take a while, and I'm not exactly a mathematician
>"The Big Bang" at least infers an explosion.
Misnomers exist.
>Escape speeds of an infinite gravity well are infinite.
Again, my apologies, I'm not a physicist. If you have questions regarding how it was physically possible, try actually reading the theory to answer your concerns.
>There was no pin. The pin is a lie.
The Big Bang happened.

>>984705
who was at odds with the doctrine for another 20 years before the pope said "well I guess it doesn't conflict with Catholicism"
And by that time it was the commonly held belief.
Lemaitre was a heretic trying to rectify a scientific discovery with faith until he wasn't.

>>984729
Completely and totally proving my point.

>>984718
I'll never understand that God is ridiculous, and neither will you. Because God is not ridiculous; He is relational. He is relational within Himself and desires to form relationships, collaborations even, with His creations.

Just go ahead and imagine everything in the universe fitting inside the head of a pin. And then wonder where the pin came from.

You know bullets don't get fired from guns but get propelled by increasingly voluminous gasses, yes? Same fucking difference.

It was not physically possible, and did not happen. Nor is it seriously considered to have happened, and in fact, new mathematical models have been made demonstrating that it never happened at all.

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

The papists really did a job on your head, kid. Don't take it out on God. Take it out on the pedophiles.

>>984738
except Lemaitre discovered the big bang because he was an exceptional scientist applying previous knowledge by Hubble and Einstein - not because he was an exceptional theologian.

Now theologians have to ret-con everything about what religious knowledge said about the origins of the universe, ESPECIALLY the bible.

Catholics have no problem with ret-con, you can have a "Limbo" for many years until suddenly one day you never had a Limbo in the first place. But for those of us who want to talk frankly about the evolution of ideas we use a different strategy.

>>984652
It's generally understood the Pre-Pauline Christianity understood Jesus to be someone that received his divine/favored status with God at a certain point in his life, not actually being God.

Paul's letters contain a number of poems which are considered to be older than his writing (they don't match his style so we assume he took them from others). The Gospel of Thomas is also considered to contain ideas pre-Pauline, the early lines were older and represent a more authentic Jesus, and the newer lines are added much later.

Piecing together exactly what Christianity was before Paul's corruption is difficult, because his men aimed to destroy all rival literature. However basic logic should tell you that there was a tradition that predates Paul (since Paul never knew Jesus he cannot be said to be an account recorder of his teachings). We can also infer Paul's teachings were radically different to Jesus since those that did know Jesus spoke against Paul. It's generally understood that the fragmentary ideas of James and Peter's heretical writings represent what is closer to Christianity than Paul's mystery religion/Platonic interpretation.

>>984756
He didn't discover anything. He postulated something. Maybe learn the difference, dopey.

>>984757
All Christians from all times know that Jesus is God, risen from the dead, or they are not Christians.

>>984633
>Come near unto me. hear this: I have not spoken in secret from the beginning: from the time that it was,there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me.
>Isaiah 48:16
Bad translation. It should be "And now the Lord God has sent me, and His spirit"

>Exodus 19 starts with the words, "In the third month." This is explained by the words of Proverbs 22:20, "Have I not written to thee excellent (Hebrew, threefold) things in counsels and knowledge." On this Rabbi Joshua bar Nehemiah said that this is the Torah whose letters are threefold, alf, bet, g(i)ml, and everything is a Trinity: The Torah is Trinitarian, for it is composed of the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings. The Mishna (talmudical learning) is a trinity composed of Talmud (learning) halakhot (daily Jewish laws) and haggadot (historical items). The mediator consisted of a trinity of Miriam, Moses, & Aaron. Prayers are a trinity of morning, afternoon, and evening prayers. Israel is a trinity consisting of priests, Levites and Israelites. The name Moses in Hebrew consists of three letters. He is of the tribe of Levi, which again is in the Hebrew three letters. from the seed of the Patriarchs who are a trinity of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; in the third month which is Sivan, after Nisan & Iyar on mount Sin whose letters are three as it is written. "And they rested in the wilderness of Sin.".(Midrash Tanhuma on Exodus 19)
Well now, this is just a guessing game. 12 also occurs frequently in your Scripture. Does that make you believe in 12 persons?

>>984757
>The Gospel of Thomas

Holy shit are you dopey. That's a 3rd century gnostic gospel and has nothing to do with Paul at all.

File: smuggest.jpg (4KB, 113x125px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 113x125px

>>984758
oh noes, a semantic nitpicking instead of an argument!
gg no re

>>984763
>And now the Lord God has sent me, and His spirit"

Yes, and the two are One.

12 is an important number in the bible; it's a number of governance, of perfection of authority. It's used hundreds of times. Maybe a little less than hundreds. But quite often.

This is for you. Read it well. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

>>984767
It's an entirely different concept. Imaginary things cannot be discovered. In fact, it refutes your entire argument.

>>984776
>12
> a one and a two
1+2=3!
>falls on knees and prays

>>984753
>neither will you.
I see him as ridiculous though.
>Just go ahead and imagine everything in the universe fitting inside the head of a pin.
I've worked out that if a hydrogen atom were completely compressed so that there's no space between its nucleus and its electrons, it would be about 0.000114829395 nanometers long. I'm not sure how to calculate it so that all 10^80 atoms are clumped in a ball, though. Atoms are really tiny, though, I'd imagine it would work out.
>and did not happen.
Lol, yes it did
>in fact, new mathematical models have been made demonstrating that it never happened at all.
Creationist sites aren't sources
>In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
Doubt it
>The papists really did a job on your head,
Your pastor did a number on yours

>>984781
Ah! I thought I was talking to a Catholic guy who was proud of Catholicism for being a part of an important discovery (omg lol like i give a fuck if this triggers you) instead I'm talking to a Young Earth Creationist who somehow figured out how to turn on a computer and work a mouse and keyboard.
Go back to having that argument about 10^258 atoms with that other 16 year old.

>>984652
Well, there's Q, but I don't know if it's a document in and of itself.

>>984765
>>984757

You're both wrong. The Gospel of Thomas is from the 1st-2nd century.

>>984776
>Yes, and the two are One.
How do you discern that from the verse?

>12 is an important number in the bible; it's a number of governance, of perfection of authority. It's used hundreds of times. Maybe a little less than hundreds. But quite often.
So you're agreeing with my point, or...?

>This is for you. Read it well. There are none so blind as those who will not see.
No, thank you. I already have an authentic Scripture.

>>983583
fuck off ahmed

File: Christian vs Protestant.jpg (469KB, 1784x1024px) Image search: [Google]

469KB, 1784x1024px

>>984616
>proddies
>Christian
'no'

>>984822
Who cares who's Christian, it's all wrong anyways :^)

>>984765
Did you even bother to read the statement about how it was written over hundreds of great deal of time, starting the pre-Pauline time?

Did you just intionally skip over the other arguements that directly refuted Paul's Christianity as authentic. Peter and James knew Jesus, Paul didn't, they started their tradition before Paul. Their traditions did not have a pre-existing or divine Jesus. When they met Paul and his doctrine they called him a fraud. Here is Paul, introducing a new docrine that is rejected by the actual followers of Christ.

Paul's men proceed to call the very doctrines of Peter and James as heresy, rejecting the original teaching of Christ. It is widely agreed by Scholars that Peter's Gospel of the new Testament is a forgery. Meaning Paul's men had to write fake documents to try to convince people that the actual follows of Christ agreed with their Paganism. They than took steps to try to destroy Peter and Jame's legacy and bury the truth.

File: 1400960441727.jpg (97KB, 475x699px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 475x699px

>>984828
>it's all wrong
Oh, you wish.

>>984577
How do you know that?

>>984833
Sod off, cultist

>>984822
I just love that you're on the heretic's side, and I'm on the born again Christian's side. Just cracks me up every time you papists think the comparison is in your favor.

>>984785
You are right about one thing. Between you and God, one of you is ridiculous.

>>984842
>falling for the born again meme
Have fun in purgatory.

File: St_Peter_sm.jpg (189KB, 942x1240px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 942x1240px

>>984842
>papists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popes#1st_century

Since this is supposed to be a History board, I'd like to point out that there is no historical evidence that Jesus existed to begin with. The Romans invented christianity when they adopted the religion.

>>984785
Gee, that's 1.2 x 10^52 light years.

Any idea how long 10^52 light years is?

It's 4.39 x 10^41 times the diameter of the entire universe.

Still want to play Big Bang?

>>984869
>>Gee, that's 1.2 x 10^52 light years.
Did you clump it in a ball?

>>984861
Watch out, they're gonna throw Josephus and Tacitus your way. Maybe even Pliny the Younger.

>>984802
There is no Q. It's a hypothetical construct. German even.

@250 AD. That's not the 2nd century.

There is One God. Father, Son, and Spirit are One God.

I'm saying that your ridiculous deflection from trinities appearing everywhere in Judaism was ironic in turning up 12's also in Judaism.

Jesus walked with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.
Jesus wrestled Jacob, and lamed his hip.
Jesus went over Jericho's assault with Joshua.
Jesus was in the fiery furnace with Meshach, Shadrach and Abednego.
Jesus met with Abraham and two angels prior to Sodom's destruction.
Jesus stopped His hand from killing Balaam.

It's all Jesus.

>>984829
I ignore all of your lies, actually. Saying gnostic gospels have any place in a conversation about christianity is like saying wheat has a place in a gluten free diet.

Paul knew Jesus better than Peter knew Jesus.

Peter, James and John gave Paul the right hand of fellowship at the Jerusalem council.

You lie, and there is no truth in you. I have told you these things many times before, and you cling to your lies like a dog clings to his vomit.

>>984861
>The Romans invented christianity when they adopted the religion.

What does this even mean? How can they adopt a religion and than invent the religion they just adopted?

>>984861
Nice atheist meme, too bad all credible historians disagree with you.

http://storage.cloversites.com/fcfgroups/documents/Why%20We%20Believe%207.pdf

>>984876
>dat damage control
cringe

>>984855
There is no purgatory. Would you suck your priest's dick if he told you it was a holy wafer?

Did that happen?

how many times?

>>984879
>A human did all those fictional things

>>984861
There's like 39 extra-biblical mentions of Jesus in antiquity. You suck as a historian.

>>984874
Can you even begin to conceive how long that thread is? No?

>>984876
There's dozens more. How does one "prepare" to face facts?

File: le catholic pedos maymay.png (99KB, 628x489px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 628x489px

>>984895
>There is no purgatory
You wish.

http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/Articles/the_bible_teaches_purgatory.pdf

>suck your priest's dick
Lookie here:

>Sue Widemark A Penn State historian, Philip Jenkins, has done in-depth research of pedophilia and sexual abuse among the clergy and has come up with some rather eye opening facts (Pedophiles and Priests, Anatomy of a Crisis, Oxford University Press, 1996, Paperback edition, 2001). It seems that while .2 to 1.7 percent of Catholic clergy have been guilty of pedophilia (or sexual abuse particularly of boys, p. 80-82), a whopping 10 percent of Protestant ministers have been found guilty of sexual misconduct with a 2 or 3 percent pedophilia rate (p. 50-52).

>This is all the more interesting, notes Jenkins, since there has been NO media term "Pastor Pedophilia" coined at all! Jenkins theorizes that the media, proving the 'point' of the 'necessity' of sexual promiscuity, overemphasizes any instance of pedophilia found among the Catholic clergy since it can use this to criticize the entire idea of celibacy. But it is interesting that the NON Celibate Protestant ministers have a MUCH GREATER problem with it than the celibate Catholic priests!

>Jenkins' research was based on several highly respected studies and statistics. He points out that whereas sexual misconduct has always been a problem, among Catholic and non-Catholic clergy as well as among the general populace, what is new now is that the 'problem' of priest sexual abuse, constructed by the media as a result of a 'moral panic' occurring in the mid-1980's.

http://www.catholic-convert.com/wp-content/uploads/SexInProtestantChurches.pdf

>>984899
God did all of those very real things. Jesus is God.

>>984909
Our demented and perverted and disgusting priests aren't the only ones to hurt children!

Great argument.

>>984894
>>984905
Those are the only ones that seem to be independent of the gospels. The rest aren't and the gospels aren't good sources as history.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/7463

>>984889
You can beleive that Paul talked to the ghost of a a dead man and received secret Gnosis from him. That's a matter of faith (aka none)

In a historical discussion this requires evidence, there's as much evidense fo Paul's visit from Jesus as there is for Muhmidd's visit from an angel, or Joseph Smith's visit from Jesus.

This is why religious discussions on /his/ are shit, Christfags cannot seperate dogma from historical reality.

>>984904
Actually I looked it up. The clump of atoms would be the size of a star. Pretty big. Good thing atoms didn't form immediately though.

>>984913
>pedophilia isn't everywhere
Great delusion.

>>984911
Then where's the archaeological evidence for Sodom or Gomorrah.

>>984919
Actually Joseph Smith said he was visited by an angel too.

>>984879
>There is no Q. It's a hypothetical construct. German even.
>German even
wat

>@250 AD. That's not the 2nd century.
The range is 50-10 AD.

>Jesus walked with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.
>Jesus wrestled Jacob, and lamed his hip.
>Jesus went over Jericho's assault with Joshua.
>Jesus was in the fiery furnace with Meshach, Shadrach and Abednego.
>Jesus met with Abraham and two angels prior to Sodom's destruction.
>Jesus stopped His hand from killing Balaam.

1. The OT doesn't mention Jesus. You're arguing for Christianity using Judaism, so it doesn't make sense to put things into the text that aren't there.

2. You're just looking for the number 3, and using that as a proof. You just admitted that the number 12 also appears many times.

3. Why didn't the Jews realize the Trinity before the time of Jesus?

I suggest you turn to true monotheism. The cognitive dissonance of the Trinity must be tiresome.

>>984939
>50-10 AD
Sorry, meant 50-140 AD.

>>984931
And he was. Same angel Mohammad was visited by. Same message. Everyone else is doing it wrong, here's the new way to do it right.

>>984915
Why is it that the only source you people cite every time is written by an edgy polyamorous cuckold?

>>984915
There's literally dozens more, and none of them have any connection to the bible. Hence the term "extra-biblical".

Now tell me why you get to throw out all of the bible.

>>984949
Why can't you separate his work from his personal life?

>>984869

Actually, it's roughly the size of the Solar System, if you degenerate the hydrogen to the point where the electrons are pressed against the nucleii.

It's nowhere close to 1 light year, let alone 10 to the 52nd.

>>984919
Jesus is alive, the main point of Christianity. Bodily came down from heaven; bodily rose from the dead; bodily working right now on finishing touches on the New Jerusalem.

>>984920
Not that I believe you, but which is bigger? A star, or the head of a pin?

>>984956
Because it's clear that he can't keep his enormous personal baggage from influencing his writings?

File: 1450174136905.jpg (39KB, 800x670px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 800x670px

>>984960
>Not that I believe you
https://www.quora.com/If-all-the-matter-in-the-universe-was-to-be-clumped-into-one-spot-how-big-would-it-be

Do you think atoms or matter formed immediately?

>>984952
Because it's wrought with contradictions. "Extra-biblical" just means it's outside the Bible, that doesn't mean it's independent of the Bible. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

>>984963
That has nothing to do with his work. You sound stupid.

>>984952
Also, I don't throw out all of the Bible, just the Gospels.

File: The Great Demonic Deception.jpg (549KB, 1200x903px) Image search: [Google]

549KB, 1200x903px

>>984946
>Same angel Mohammad was visited by
He was actually visited by a false angel of light, it was a demon, a fallen angel of deception. Satan and his workers are great mimickers and Muhammad, deceived, established a demonic cult of Allah (false-God) called Islam (meaning submission to this false-God, i.e. Satan) which was spread like wild fire by the sword due to the delusion that it is the last revelation of God Almighty.

Islam is none other than Satan's magnum opus, which now has 1.6 billion adherents (23% of the world population) and which will probably be followed by half of the world population by 2050.

>For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

2 Corinthians 11:13-15

File: The Failed Demonic Deception.jpg (157KB, 827x1189px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 827x1189px

>>984982
>>984946
Muhammad was Satan's pawn, merely a man, he was easily deceived.
Jesus is the Christ prophesied in scripture, born of God, undeceivable.

>Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort; Who comforteth us in all our tribulation, that we may be able to comfort them which are in any trouble, by the comfort wherewith we ourselves are comforted of God. For as the sufferings of Christ abound in us, so our consolation also aboundeth by Christ.

2 Corinthians 1:3-5

>>984958
Bullshit. It's 1.76 x 10^17 suns.

176,000,000,000,000,000 suns

In the head of a pin.

I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.

>>984982
>He was actually visited by a false angel of ligh
I think that was his point, you retard.

>>984982
Yes. Same angel. Satan is an angel.

>>984987

>Stars
>Degenerate matter

>Nobody is claiming "head of a pin".

I suppose though, that if you could read things and understand them though, you'd realize how patched together your faith is, and how very few of your books actually fit together, like they were written by a bunch of different people living hundreds if not thousands of years apart, with totally different agendas and beliefs.

But your theological idiocy aside, why don't you go look up what white dwarves are, and then you can get a grasp of what even mildly compressed matter is capable of; how the more massive the dwarf, the less volume it has. And that's before you hit things like the Chandrasekhar limit.

>>984967
Of course this assumes that you don't include dark matter

>>984982
You could also pull out quotes from the Quaran that say Muhammid is right and the bible is wrong.

You are not making an argument with evidence. You are just saying I am right because I feel I am right.

Whether Paul was visited by Jesus, Muhammad visted by an angel, or Joseph Smith by Jesus, or whether I was visited by all of them last week all have comparable amounts of evidence (very low)

>>983552
>Lying sack of shit spotted.
were they not followers?

>>985004
>Jesus
God on Earth.
>Muhammad
Illiterate nobody deceived by Satan.
>Joseph Smith
Con man whose Book of Mormon is a joke.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VKT4hrBTuk

>>985015
Literally the only difference is your opinion on them. You have no evidence that he was god on earth.

>>985015

>Con man whose Book of Mormon is a joke.

Are you seriously trying to claim the Gospels aren't?

>Can't agree on what day Jesus was crucified on.
>All of them except John explicitly record him sinning by screwing up the Paschal sacrifice, but oh yeah, he's sinless
>Lots and lots of geographic and cultural errors pertaining to their supposed origin.
>Inconsistent genealogies
>Evidence of copying from each other
>Misquoting of older scripture, sometimes even attributing such to Jesus.

File: 3dshroud.gif (440KB, 415x561px) Image search: [Google]

440KB, 415x561px

>>985021
>You have no evidence that he was god on earth
Oh really?

>>985041
AHAHAHAHAHAHA That made me laugh. A medieval forgery. Hilarious.

File: C14SampleLocation.jpg (68KB, 819x666px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 819x666px

>>985046
>A medieval forgery
Nice meme.

The sample was cut from a corner of the Shroud which was part of a later repair, the dating contradicts other evidence, the sample may also have been contaminated by bacteria, smoke or reactive carbon and further evidence shows that the calculations were done incorrectly. You can verify all of my statements.

The three dating labs, according to a scientific protocol agreed upon in 1985, were supposed to cut several samples of the Shroud from different locations. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. Instead, the scientific adviser to the Arch Diocese of Turin, Luigi Gonnella, decided to violate the protocol and allowed only one sample to be cut from an outside corner where it had been handled hundreds of times over the centuries as it was held up for public viewing.

This flawed examination was actually discredited by Dr. Ray Rogers who published in the January, 2005 issue of Thermochimica Acta. Dr. Rogers stated, in part, ''The radiocarbon sample was thus not part of the original cloth and is invalid for determining the age of the shroud.''

New tests that have been carried out in the University of Padua's laboratories by professors from various Italian universities, led by Giulio Fanti, Italian professor of mechanical and thermal measurement at the University of Padua’s engineering faculty, have dated the fibres from the cloth to a period between 300BC to 400AD.

File: RaesCorner-1.png (298KB, 522x581px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 522x581px

>>985046
>>985050
The Shroud of Turin’s images are superficial and fully contained within a thin layer of starch fractions and saccharides that coats the outermost fibers of the Shroud. The color is a caramel-like substance, probably the product of an amino/carbonyl reaction. Where there is no image, the carbohydrate coating is clear. There is also a very faint image of the face on the reverse side of the Shroud of Turin which lines up with the image on the front of the cloth. There is no image content between the two superficial image layers indicating that nothing soaked through to form the image on the other side.

Until recently, it was widely believed that the images on the Shroud of Turin were produced by something which resulted in oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of the polysaccharide structure of the linen fibers. This is incorrect. The coating, whether imaged or clear, can be reduced with diimide or removed with adhesive leaving clear cellulose fiber.

The images as they appear on the Shroud of Turin are said to be negative because when photographed the resulting negative is a positive image.

The Turin Shroud was examined with visible and ultraviolet spectrometry, infrared spectrometry, x-ray fluorescence spectrometry, thermography, pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry, lasermicroprobe Raman analyses, and microchemical testing. No evidence for pigments (paint, dye or stains) or artist’s media was found anywhere on the Shroud of Turin.

>>985041

>Carbon dated to the 13th-14th century
>Woven in a style inconsistent with what we have of 1st century Judean burial garments
>First historical mention of it is how it was decried as a fraud
>Inconsistent with the Gospels account of how Jesus's head was covered with a separate piece of cloth to the rest of his body.


Do you know what the word "evidence" means?

>>984925
In the plains of Shinar. They found the scorched wreckage. Look into it if you're interested.

>>985021
>>985041
>>985046
>>985050
GODDAMNIT NOW LOOK WHAT YOU'VE DONE. HE'S GONNA BUST OUT THE COPYPASTE. IT'S ANOTHER SHROUD THREAD.

File: 1460012900295.png (99KB, 247x248px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 247x248px

>>985052
>>985050
>it's that time again
This thread is about to go golden.

File: Jesus Christ.webm (3MB, 640x352px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x352px

>>985046
New experiments date the Shroud of Turin to the 1st century AD. They comprise three tests; two chemical and one mechanical. The chemical tests were done with Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) and Raman spectroscopy, examining the relationship between age and a spectral
property of ancient flax textiles. The mechanical test measured several micro-mechanical characteristics of flax fibers, such as tensile strength.

The results were compared to similar tests on samples of cloth from between 3250 BC and 2000 AD whose dates are accurately known. FTIR identifies chemical bonds in a molecule by producing an infrared absorption spectrum. The spectra produce a profile of the sample, a distinctive molecular fingerprint that can be used to identify its components. Raman Spectroscopy uses the light scattered off of a sample as opposed to the light absorbed by a sample. It is a very sensitive method of identifying specific chemicals.

The tests on fibers from the Shroud of Turin produced the following dates:

FTIR = 300 BC ± 400 years; Raman spectroscopy = 200 BC ± 500 years; and multi-parametric mechanical = 400 AD ± 400 years. All the dates have a 95% certainty.

The average of all three dates is 33 BC ± 250 years (the collective uncertainty is less than the individual test uncertainties). The average date is compatible with the historic date of Jesus’ death on the cross in 30 AD, and is far older than the medieval dates obtained with the flawed Carbon-14 sample in 1988. The range of uncertainty for each test is high because the number of sample cloths used for comparison was low; 8 for FTIR, 11 for Raman, and 12 for the mechanical test.

The scientists note that “future calibrations based on a greater number of samples and coupled with ad hoc cleaning procedures could significantly improve its accuracy, though it is not easy to find ancient samples adequate for the test.”

(1/2)

File: Turin_shroud_positive_and_negative_displaying_original_color_information_708_x_465_pixels_94_KB.jpg (92KB, 708x465px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 708x465px

>>985046
>>985062
They used tiny fibers extracted from the Shroud by micro-analyst Giovanni Riggi di Numana, who gave them to Fanti. Riggi passed away in 2008, but he had been involved in the intensive scientific examination of the Shroud of Turin by the STURP group in 1978, and on April 21, 1988 was the man who cut from the Shroud the thin 7 x 1 cm sliver of linen that was used for carbon dating.

These tests were carried out in University of Padua laboratories by professors from various Italian universities, led by Giulio Fanti, Italian professor of mechanical and thermal measurement at the University of Padua’s engineering faculty. He co-authored reports of the findings in 1) a paper in the journal Vibrational Spectroscopy, July 2013, “Non-destructive dating of ancient flax textiles by means of vibrational spectroscopy” by Giulio Fanti, Pietro Baraldi, Roberto Basso, and Anna Tinti, Volume 67, pages 61-70; 2) a paper titled “A new cyclic-loads machine for the measurement of micro-mechanical properties of single flax fibers coming from the Turin Shroud” by Giulio Fanti and Pierandrea Malfi for the XXI AIMETA (Italian Association of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics) congress in 2013, and 3) the 2013 book “Il Mistero della Sindone” (The Mystery of the Shroud), written by Giulio Fanti and Saverio Gaeta in Italian.

(2/2)

http://www.newgeology.us/Shroud.pdf

>>984939
>Jesus

Everywhere in the OT it refers to "the angel of the Lord", it's Jesus. Not an angel. An angel as in messenger.

The angel of the Lord blessed Ishmael and Hagar. An angel can't do that.

Jacob wrestled the angel of the Lord, and named the place after it, saying he had seen the face of God and lived.

Abraham knew Jesus, and talked to Him face to face, again as the angel of the Lord.

Not good enough for you, I know, but good enough for Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

File: 1460496503719.jpg (186KB, 600x592px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 600x592px

>>985054
>Carbon dated to the 13th-14th century
The 1988 Carbon-14 tests done at Oxford, Zurich and Arizona Labs used pieces of the same sample cut from a corner (>>973397 >>973399)

1. A paper published in Jan 20, 2005 in the journal Thermochimica Acta by Dr. Ray Rogers, retired Fellow with the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory and lead chemist with the original STURP science team (the 1978 Shroud of Turin Research Project, involving approximately 35 scientists directly examining the Shroud for five days), has shown conclusively that the sample cut from The Shroud of Turin in 1988 was taken from an area of the cloth that was re-woven during the middle ages. Here are some excerpts:

"Pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry results from the sample area, coupled with microscopic and microchemical observations, prove that the radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of Turin. The radiocarbon date was thus not valid for determining the true age of the shroud."

"As part of the Shroud of Turin research project (STURP), I took 32 adhesive-tape samples from all areas of the shroud and associated textiles
in 1978." "It enabled direct chemical testing on recovered linen fibers and particulates".

"If the shroud had been produced between 1260 and 1390 AD, as indicated by the radiocarbon analyses, lignin should be easy to detect. A linen produced in 1260 AD would have retained about 37% of its vanillin in 1978...The Holland cloth, and all other medieval linens, gave the test [i.e. tested positive] for vanillin wherever lignin could be observed on growth nodes. The disappearance of all traces of vanillin from the lignin in the shroud indicates a much older age than the radiocarbon laboratories reported."

(1/2)

File: Shroud.png (1MB, 1270x594px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1270x594px

>>985054
>>985070
"The fire of 1532 could not have greatly affected the vanillin content of lignin in all parts of the shroud equally. The thermal conductivity of linen is very low... therefore, the unscorched parts of the folded cloth could not have become very hot." "The cloth's center would not have heated at all in the time available. The rapid change in color from black to white at the margins of the scorches illustrates this fact." "Different amounts of vanillin would have been lost in different areas. No samples from any location on the shroud gave the vanillin test [i.e. tested positive]." "The lignin on shroud samples and on samples from the Dead Sea scrolls does not give the test [i.e. tests negative]."

"Because the shroud and other very old linens do not give the vanillin test [i.e. test negative], the cloth must be quite old." "A determination of the kinetics of vanillin loss suggests that the shroud is between 1300- and 3000- years old. Even allowing for errors in the measurements and assumptions about storage conditions, the cloth is unlikely to be as young as 840 years."

"A gum/dye/mordant [(for affixing dye)] coating is easy to observe on...radiocarbon [sample] yarns. No other part of the shroud shows such a
coating." "The radiocarbon sample had been dyed. Dyeing was probably done intentionally on pristine replacement material to match the color of the older, sepia-colored cloth." "The dye found on the radiocarbon sample was not used in Europe before about 1291 AD and was not common until more than 100 years later."

"Specifically, the color and distribution of the coating implies that repairs were made at an unknown time with foreign linen dyed to match the older original material." "The consequence of this conclusion is that the radiocarbon sample was not representative of the original cloth."

(2/3)

File: slide_217479_820769_free.jpg (386KB, 767x1000px) Image search: [Google]

386KB, 767x1000px

>>985054
>>985070
>>985075
"The combined evidence from chemical kinetics, analytical chemistry, cotton content, and pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry proves that the material from the radiocarbon area of the shroud is significantly different from that of the main cloth. The radiocarbon sample was thus not part of the original cloth and is invalid for determining the age of the shroud."

"A significant amount of charred cellulose was removed during a restoration of the shroud in 2002." "A new radiocarbon analysis should be done on the charred material retained from the 2002 restoration."

Raymond N. Rogers. 20 January 2005. Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of turin. Thermochimica Acta, Vol. 425, Issue 1-2, Pages 189-194.

2. The Fire-Model Tests of Dr. Dmitri Kouznetsov in 1994 and Drs. John Jackson and Propp in 1998, which replicated the famous Fire of 1532,
demonstrated that the fire added carbon isotopes to the linen.

Dmitri Kouznetsov, Andrey Ivanov, Pavel Veletsky. 5 January 1996. Effects of fires and biofractionation of carbon isotopes on results of radiocarbon dating of old textiles: the Shroud of Turin. Journal of Archaeological Science, Volume 23, Issue 1, Pages 109-121. doi:10.1006/jasc.1996.0009

Jackson, John P. and Propp, Keith. 1997. On the evidence that the radiocarbon date of the Turin Shroud was significantly affected by the 1532 fire. Actes du III Symposium Scientifique International du CIELT, Nice, France.

(3/3)

http://www.newgeology.us/Shroud.pdf

File: i4.jpg (41KB, 262x437px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 262x437px

>>985054
>>Carbon dated to the 13th-14th century
See >>985050 >>985052 >>985062 >>985066

>Woven in a style inconsistent with what we have of 1st century Judean burial garments
A lie.

In 2002, a team of experts did restoration work, such as removing the patches from 1534 and replacing the backing cloth. One of the specialists was Swiss textile historian Mechthild Flury-Lemberg. She was surprised to find a peculiar stitching pattern in the seam of one long side of the Shroud, where a three-inch wide strip of the same original fabric was sewn onto a larger segment.

The stitching pattern, which she says was the work of a professional, is quite similar to the hem of a cloth found in the tombs of the Jewish fortress of Masada. The Masada cloth dates to between 40 BC and 73 AD.

This kind of stitch has never been found in Medieval Europe.

http://www.newgeology.us/presentation24.html

>>985054
>>Inconsistent with the Gospels account of how Jesus's head was covered with a separate piece of cloth to the rest of his body
You wish.

Read this:
''A Clean Cloth'', What Greek Word Usage Tells Us about the Burial Wrappings of Jesus, Diana Fulbright, Director of Research, Shroud of Turin Center
https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n62part7.pdf

File: 2673de5a64ed40572de8d88eb01b50bb.jpg (40KB, 736x439px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 736x439px

>>985054
>Inconsistent
The image on the Shroud is of a man 5 feet 10 ½ inches tall, about 175 pounds, covered with scourge wounds and blood stains. Numerous surgeons and pathologists (including Dr. Frederick Zugibe (Medical Examiner - Rockland, New York), Dr. Robert Bucklin (Medical Examiner - Las Vegas, Nevada), Dr. Herman Moedder (Germany), the late Dr. Pierre Barbet (France), and Dr. David Willis (England)) have studied the match between the Words, Weapons and Wounds, and agree that the words of the New Testament regarding the Passion clearly match the wounds depicted on the Shroud, and that these wounds are consistent with the weapons used by ancient Roman soldiers in Crucifixion.

Specifically, the scourge marks on the shoulders, back, and legs of the Man of the Shroud match the flagrum (Roman whip) which has three leather thongs, each having two lead or bone pellets (plumbatae) on the end. The lance wound in the right side matches the Roman Hasta (4cm x 1 cm spear wound). Iron nails (7" spikes) were used in the wrist area (versus the palms as commonly depicted in Medieval art). These marks, combined with the capping of thorns which is not found anywhere else in crucifixion literature of ancient Roman (Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Elder or Pliny the Younger) or Jewish (Flavius Joesphus, Philo of Alexandria) historians create a unique signature of the historical Jesus of Nazareth.

http://www.newgeology.us/Shroud.pdf

File: two-and-three-lead-spheres-cropped-1.png (183KB, 491x500px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 491x500px

>>985054
>>985089
Those blood particles have been tested and proven to be human blood.

File: image27.png (414KB, 495x500px) Image search: [Google]

414KB, 495x500px

>>985054
>>985089
>>985091

File: dd56efda310914c683944138f22f01a1.jpg (58KB, 640x519px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 640x519px

>>985054
>>985089
>>985091
>>985094

File: flargumWilson2000P56.jpg (248KB, 750x1323px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 750x1323px

>>985054
>>985089
>>985091
>>985094
>>985097

File: flagellation-of-christ-1311.jpg (488KB, 1084x1000px) Image search: [Google]

488KB, 1084x1000px

>>985054
Problems for the forgery theory.

The scourge marks on the Shroud are physiologically accurate. When examined under a microscope, each scourge mark reveals a slightly depressed center and raised edges. Under ultraviolet light each scourge mark can be seen to have a "halo" of lighter colour surrounding it. These halos were chemically tested and found to be blood serum which is left behind after a blood clot forms and then retracts inwards as it dries, a process called syneresis. These scourge mark indented centres and raised edges on the Shroud are not visible to the naked eye, but can only be seen when examined under a microscope and the serum halos can only be seen under ultraviolet light. This is further evidence that the Shroud could not have been created by an artist in the Middle Ages, or earlier, because that knowledge about blood clot structure, let alone a microscope and an ultraviolet light source to see it, did not then exist for many centuries into the future.

Each one of the over 100 scourge wounds on the Shroud matches exactly what would have been caused by a type of Roman flagrum buried in the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in AD 79. So a fourteenth century or earlier forger would have had to possess a faultless archaeological knowledge of a first century Roman scourging with a flagrum as well as make no normal artists' mistakes since each one of the over 100 scourge marks has identical dimensions. Only from the Middle Ages did artists depict the scourging of Jesus and even the best of them were vague about the details. But the scourge-marks on the Shroud are depicted with a realism that is unknown to the art of any period.

Pic related, "Flagellation of Christ" by Duccio di Buoninsegna (c. 1255-1319). "The scourge marks are represented as red dribbles all over the body, including the arms but not the legs".

File: ManofSorrowsJean Colombe700.jpg (187KB, 687x800px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 687x800px

>>985054
>>985102
Agnostic art historian Thomas de Wesselow states:

"Once again, though, it [the Shroud] differs dramatically from anything envisaged in the Middle Ages. The vast majority of medieval images of the dead or dying Christ fail to depict any scourge marks at all ... Christ is sometimes shown bleeding in depictions of the flagellation, but the effect is always rather crude. In Duccio's rendering of the scene, for example, the scourge marks are represented as red dribbles all over the body, including the arms but not the legs ...The artist displays no knowledge of the Roman flagrum, nor any conception of how it was wielded. Even a fifteenth-century artist as accomplished as Jean Colombe, who definitely knew the Shroud, was unable to reproduce its convincing pattern of scourge marks ... To attribute the marks on the Shroud to a provincial unknown working in the mid fourteenth century is therefore ridiculous"

Pic related, "Man of Sorrows" by Jean Colombe (c. 1430-1493). "Colombe, who definitely knew the Shroud, was unable to reproduce its pattern of scourge marks."

Moreover, the medieval or earlier forger would have had to use goniometry, the science of calculating angles, to correctly work out the angle of each one of the over 100 scourge marks on the Shroud, but the first goniometer was not invented until 1780.

In conclusion, the pattern of scourge wounds on the Shroud correlates remarkably closely with the Gospels' description of the scourging of Jesus[64] and with what has, since the fourteenth century, been discovered by modern archaeology about first century Roman scourging.

atheists on suicide watch

glorious thread

oh hay it's the shroud troll again. yay.

File: Medieval Jesus.jpg (187KB, 787x1024px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 787x1024px

All of what I have explained above can be found in the voluminous scientific and popular literature on the shroud of Turin. At this point, I would like to offer a different paradigm for assessing the accuracy of the 14th century date and the resulting claim that the shroud is the work of a 14th century forger. Again, this article is not addressing the issue of whether or not the Shroud of Turin was the burial cloth of Jesus of Nazareth and its value as a "relic" of Christianity. It addresses only whether the shroud is a genuine archaeological artifact of a 1st century crucifixion. This paradigm assumes that the radiocarbonists’ claim that the Shroud of Turin is a 14th century forgery is correct. It is based on what that conclusion tells us about the forger. It tells us that:

1. The forger first painted the bloodstains before he painted the image.

2. The forger integrated forensic qualities to his image that would only be known 20th century science.

3. The forger duplicated blood flow patterns in perfect forensic agreement to blood flow from the wrists at 65� from vertical to suggest the exact crucifixion position of the arms.

4. The forger "painted" the blood flows with genuine group AB blood that he had "spiked" with excessive amounts of bilirubin since the forger knew that severe concussive scourging with a Roman flagrum would cause erythrocyte hemolysis and jaundice.

5. The forger "plotted" the scourge marks on the body of the "man in the shroud" to be consistent under forensic examination with two scourgers of varying height.

6. The forger also duplicated abrasion and compression marks on the scourge wounds of the shoulders to suggest to 20th century forensic examiners that the "man in the shroud" had carried a heavy weight following the scourging.

7. The forger, against all convention of medieval artistry, painted the body he was "hoaxing" as Jesus of Nazareth, nude to conform to genuine Roman crucifixions.

>>985118

There really needs a way for the jans or mods to assign someone a trip so the rest of us can ignore him.

8. The forger, as the forensic genius he was, illustrated the nails of crucifixion accurately through the wrists rather than the hands as in all other conventional medieval representations. He also took into account that the thumbs of a crucified victim would rotate inward as a result of median nerve damage as the nails passed through the spaces of Destot.

9. The forger was clever enough to "salt" the linen with the pollens of plants indigenous only to the environs of Jerusalem in anticipation of 20th century palynological analysis.

10. The forger was an artist who surpassed the talents of all known artists to the present day, being able to "paint" an anatomically and photographically perfect human image in a photographic negative manner, centuries before photography, and be able to do so without being able to check his work, close up, as he progressed.

11. The forger was able to paint this image with some unknown medium using an unknown technique, 30-40 feet away in order to discern the shadowy image as he continued.

12. The forger was clever enough to depict an adult with an unplaited pony-tail, sidelocks and a beard style consistent with a Jewish male of the 1st century.

13. The forger thought of such minute details as incorporating dirt from the bare feet of the "man in the shroud" consistent with the calcium carbonate soil of the environs of Jerusalem.

14. This forger was such an expert in 20th century biochemistry, medicine, forensic pathology and anatomy, botany, photography and 3-D computer analysis that he has foiled all the efforts of modern science. His unknown and historically unduplicated artistic technique surpasses all great historical artists, making the pale efforts of DaVinci, Michaelangelo, Raphael and Botticelli appear as infantile scribblings.

It is an irrefutable fact that there is NO paint or pigment on the Shroud of Turin leaving the only explanation of the technique of the forger to have used "photography" to manufacture the relic in the THIRTEENTH CENTURY!! Some authors have gone so far as to suggest exactly that. This is patently absurd!

CONCLUSION:

The Shroud of Turin is a genuine artifact of a first century Roman crucifixion of an adult Jewish male. The radiocarbon dating placing the manufacture of the linen in the 14th century was flawed by extrinsic C14 accumulated over centuries of fungal growth, candle smoke and the intense heat of the fire of 1532. There is NO paint on the linen of the shroud and is not the artifice of a forger.

File: 1513326_10201456396359204_325539440_n.jpg (29KB, 475x352px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 475x352px

>>985118
>>985123

File: 1460465696281.jpg (94KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 500x500px

>>985062
interesting

>>985110
I actually did think about compiling all the ways the shroud is fake, but then I realized you already knew all of them existed.

I found the guy who recreated the image using linen cloth, ochre pigment and a blotter the most fascinating, didn't you?

How he used a bas relief of a man's face, covered it with the linen, and then dabbed the pigment onto it, capturing the 3D effect?

And then the genius part where he baked the linen, scorching the outside into an image? Which he then washed, leaving no pigments behind? Making a completely identical form of an impression on the linen?

Did you enjoy that video?

What's that, you say? You never saw that video?

Why, I never.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MoDMrcXXj8

Good thing those atheists never relied on this shroud hoax as proof of Jesus, huh brother!

>>985129

>Been BTFO in every thread you post this in, how the 1988 tests are still the best, how FITR et al aren't good at dating organic material, how microscopic examination precludes the "invisible patch theories", etc.
>Ignore it every time
>Strut around and proclaim victory over atheists.

I'm reminded of the old adage about playing chess with a pigeon.

>>985142
>>Been BTFO in every thread you post this in
Oh really?

https://desustorage.org/his/search/subject/the%20holy%20shroud/

Why are atheists so dishonest?

>>985046
Even if it was a forgery it wouldn't prove Jesus was God or that that the gospels were valid. It wouldn't even prove the person on it is Jesus.

Hell that's not even how Jesus looks in the earliest drawings of him.

File: 115_15.jpg (712KB, 960x626px) Image search: [Google]

712KB, 960x626px

>>985142
>he 1988 tests are still the best
Hopes were soon dashed in 1988 when the cloth was carbon dated by three laboratories in Zurich, Oxford and Arizona. They came back with a date range of 1260 to 1390 declaring the cloth only 600-700 years old. So much for the Shroud being authentic. The New York Times announced that the Shroud was a fake, end of story.

But the story has a plot that few know about and is starting to make the news. But lets go back to 1988 first. The three dating labs, according to a scientific protocol agreed upon in 1985, were supposed to cut several samples of the Shroud from different locations. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. Instead, the scientific adviser to the Arch Diocese of Turin, Luigi Gonnella, decided to violate the protocol and allowed only one sample to be cut from an outside corner where it had been handled hundreds of times over the centuries as it was held up for public viewing.

One would think that a sample is a sample and why would it make any difference? That is like saying DNA is DNA, but not if you have the wrong DNA. How could it be a bad sample? The Shroud was in a fire in 1532 that nearly destroyed the cloth. Eight gaping holes were patched up and the entire cloth was attached to a backing cloth for support. This occurred in 1534 at a time when weaving had become an art and professional weavers were called upon to do “invisible mending” on fine tapestries restoring them to their original condition.

(1/2)

>>985142
>>985157
Now for what’s making the news. The violation of the sampling protocol in 1988 appears to have been a colossal mistake. Recent micro-chemical tests performed on thread samples from the area cut for carbon dating have been compared with threads taken from the main body of the Shroud and low and behold they are not the same! It appears that Gonella and the carbon labs were fooled by the handiwork of highly skilled French re-weavers according to museum textile experts.

Another violation of the protocol now seems more important too. The labs were supposed to do micro-chemical tests on the sample to make sure it was representative of the entire cloth. Guess what, they didn’t do that either. It seems like they just looked at it and said, “Yep, sure looks like the Shroud to me. Let’s cut it and get out of here.”

(2/2)

More: http://shroud2000.com/CarbonDatingNews.html

>>985148
Read:
>>985119
>>985124
>>985126

>>985118
>troll
nice buzzword kiddo

>>985147
>https://desustorage.org/his/search/subject/the%20holy%20shroud/

Yes, in those threads, you will find posts showing how nobody takes the tests you cite seriously, because of a wide variety of methodological flaws. For instance, the Fanti testing that you bring up so much have yet to demonstrate how the material he tested is from the shroud of Turin at all.

You were blown the fuck out, and are either too stupid to realize or too trollish to care. Pigeons playing chess.

File: pray-codex.jpg (217KB, 800x1159px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 800x1159px

>wounds do not correspond with medieval depictions of the Crucifixion, and actually correspond with actual Roman crucifixion techniques from the period of Jesus's death
>nobody has ever even come close to figuring out how it was "faked", theory after theory has been debunked
>nobody can explain why somebody would make a fake depiction of Christ that is most invisible without modern photo manipulation
>it is referenced in history far before the sixty five year margin of error of the 1988 radiocarbon testing
>the weave of the Shroud matches that of contemporary weaving in the Levant during Jesus's lifetime
>DNA analysis of pollen on the shroud confirms that it travelled from the Far East
>the linen confirms to Jewish burial cloth standards and is measurable in exact cubit units used in the Levant at the time
Why the fuck exactly are we supposed to just drop this topic because of one test 30 years ago? And why hasn't there been another one? One shitty test is done and we're supposed to believe this literally impossible object just materialized in 14th century France out of nowhere?

>>985129
The funny part is that if you just fold the shroud in half, for it to fit the face and back of the head, Jesus would have to be about 1/2 inch thick.

This asshole knows it's a fake, and only lives to piss off people who love Jesus, and/or hate obtuse trolls.

File: PrayManuscript.jpg (156KB, 288x417px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 288x417px

>>985168
this

In the Budapest National Library is the Hungarian Pray Manuscript, or Pray Codex, the oldest surviving text of the Hungarian language. It was written between 1192 and 1195 AD (65 years before the earliest Carbon-14 date in the 1988 tests). One of its illustrations shows preparations for the burial of Christ.

File: HolesInPrayCodex.jpg (57KB, 300x248px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 300x248px

>>985171
The picture includes a burial cloth with the same herringbone weave as the Shroud, plus 4 holes near one of the edges. The holes form an "L" shape.

File: PokerHoles.jpg (35KB, 736x324px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 736x324px

>>985173
This odd pattern of holes is found on the Shroud of Turin.

File: HolesInShroud.jpg (31KB, 249x248px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 249x248px

>>985176
They are burn holes, perhaps from a hot poker or incense embers that predate the 1532 fire. There are four sets of the holes, showing how the Shroud must have been folded in four layers when the holes were made. The holes in the top layer are large, and they get progressively smaller in the next three.

http://www.newgeology.us/presentation24.html

File: 3 (original 2).png (818KB, 639x762px) Image search: [Google]

818KB, 639x762px

>>985166
>how nobody takes the tests you cite seriously
>nobody
You mean atheists who will keep denying the newer tests even if in 2025 parts of the shroud on which the image appear are dated back to between 30AD and 35AD with 99% accuracy? Of course you'll still say ''m-muh 1988 tests with a sample taken from le corner from a medieval reparation are perfect!!!1 s-stop!!!''

>>985050
>>985052
>>985062
>>985066
>>985070
>>985075
>>985078

>You were blown the fuck out
Wake up pal, YOU are getting blown the fuck out with actual facts.

>b-but 1988!
kek, sit down

File: 1449992856088.jpg (167KB, 500x555px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 500x555px

ITT: atheists getting raped in every hole

Glorious.

Thanks a lot man, I'm saving everything.

>>985189
Nigga, where are the sources?

>>985189

The Vatican won't endorse them. I'm pretty sure they're not atheists.

File: pragmatiko-prosopo-tou-iisou-ntokimanter-700x360.jpg (68KB, 880x500px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 880x500px

>>985200
Summary of scientific and historical evidence supporting the authenticity of the Shroud:
http://www.newgeology.us/Shroud.pdf

Shroud-like coloration of linen by nanosecond laser pulses in the vacuum ultraviolet (it explains that they replicated the shroud's qualities using laser pulsations, which so far is the only way anyone has been able the replicate the shroud's qualities):
http://www.sindone.info/DILAZZA3.pdf

Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of Turin:
http://www.shroud.it/ROGERS-3.PDF

Nuclear imaging:
http://shroud.com/pdfs/whanger.pdf
http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/accett2.pdf

3D holographic information:
http://www.khouse.org/articles/2009/847/
http://www.ohioshroudconference.com/papers/p24.pdf

Raymond N. Rogers' observations and conclusions:
http://shroudnm.com/docs/2013-01-10-Yannick-Cl%C3%A9ment-Reflections-on-Ray-Rogers-Shroud-Work.pdf

Also, here's some secular peer-reviewed scientific journal articles on the Shroud of Turin:
http://shroud.typepad.com/topics/2005/10/secular_peerrev.html

>>985119
>>985124
>>985126
Hmmm, interesting.

>>985062
>dat webm
fucking incredible, got a link?

>>985218
Here you go fampai:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNJPJ4JwHeE

(watch 59:21 - 1:25:29)

>>985227
thanks lad

>>985021
>>985046
Status: told

>>985237
kek No. No matter what he does, he won't overthrow the 1988 carbon dating.

File: Jesus Christ-min.jpg (677KB, 1971x2400px) Image search: [Google]

677KB, 1971x2400px

>>985168
>Why the fuck exactly are we supposed to just drop this topic because of one test 30 years ago?
Because the Lord scares atheists.

>>985068
>Everywhere in the OT it refers to "the angel of the Lord", it's Jesus. Not an angel. An angel as in messenger.
Where does it say that in the OT?

>The angel of the Lord blessed Ishmael and Hagar. An angel can't do that.
Why not?

>Not good enough for you, I know, but good enough for Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
Abraham, Issac, and Jacob were upon actual monotheism.

>>985200
>>985227
>>985218
>>985213
>>985198

>Suddenly, a plethora of "interest", but we still have 34 posters, same as before

Obvious samefagging is obvious. Christards confirmed for double digit IQs.

>>985251
Lookie here little buddy:
>>985050 >>985052 >>985062 >>985066 >>985070 >>985075 >>985078 >>985157 >>985158

>>985257
Nice damage control athetard.

>>985257
>same as before
Yeah because all 34 posters are spiritually empty godless nihilistic failures...nah.

>>985257
I'm equally tired of the fedoras and shroudposting, but it's incredibly obvious he's samefagging. I've been on all of the shroud threads so far (including the one on /sci/), and it was pretty much 1 guy against everyone else. Now suddenly, a bunch of people using similar language ("atheists getting destroyed", "atheists getting raped"), and poster count isn't going up? Lol nice try.

I'll just remind him that lying is a sin.

>>985295
>I'm equally tired of the fedoras

>>985295
>the fedoras
You expect us to believe that you're not a fedora?

>>985295
Sorry for posting twice in the thread ******.

>>984514
But that does not prove anything about the existence of Jesus let alone his divinity.

>>985137
>pigment
Except:
>>985052
>The Turin Shroud was examined with visible and ultraviolet spectrometry, infrared spectrometry, x-ray fluorescence spectrometry, thermography, pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry, lasermicroprobe Raman analyses, and microchemical testing. No evidence for pigments (paint, dye or stains) or artist’s media was found anywhere on the Shroud of Turin.

Also, is ''the guy who recreated the image'' Garlaschelli? He's been BTFO already:
Petrus Soons Responds To Garlaschelli
http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/soonsresponse.pdf

File: God Bless This Holy Thread.jpg (3MB, 1028x10000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1028x10000px

>>985460
3MB

>having a neat thread about the historical Paul's conflict with the early church

>samefag bombards the thread talking about a piece of cloth

>>985610
Religious discussion needs its own board. Christfags aren't worth trying to reason with.

guaranteedreplies.bat

>>985610
I don't know what samefag means: The Post

Also, my posts were replies to other posts.

>>985621

>guaranteedreplies.bait

FTFY

>>981684
>creation
stopped reading there

File: St-Paul-ephesus.jpg (92KB, 406x481px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 406x481px

>>984802
So hey, I'm >>984652 and you and the others have basically proven me right. There is nothing THAT WE HAVE that is older than Paul's letters.

And with that knowledge, I'll ask again: how are you so sure Paul introduced any great innovations to Christianity? All you have is fragments and hearsay to the contrary. The oldest Christian documents we've got support Paul's Christianity as authentic. This whole idea that he fundamentally changed the religion has no evidence.

>>985817
20-35 BCE: Jesus's origenal Apostle's learn from him. Peter and James are from this oldest form of the religion. Paul is not one of them.

45-50 AD: Paul shows up and starts spewing his theology. Peter and James directly tell Paul that his teachings are strange new ideas. Paul admits that his teachings are new!! He tries to justify it by claiming to have visions


Even fucking Paul admits what he is saying isn't the original doctrine!

>>985896
So where are the original teachings of the Church, the ones Paul supposedly contradicted?

>>986019
They're the gospels.

>>986036
>gospels earlier than Paul's letters
there isn't a reference to the gospels within the church until the mid-2nd century. Mark probably was written in 70 at the earliest and all the other canonical gospels are heavily based on Mark

>>986047
There was an oral tradition and Paul didn't bring it up because he was writing letters to other Christians who knew the story already.

>>986053
>oral tradition
do you have proof?

>>986054
No, I don't but it's what people say, isn't it?

>>986066
why does it matter if that's what people say? let's talk about the evidence not what "people say"

>>986083
I'm not even the dude you originally replied to, I just figured that would be his answer. Dude, I'm even a mythicist.

>>986101
hello my fellow jesus myth dudebro

>>986019
Ebionetes. These teachings are not hypothetical. They are described in various letters condemning them as heresies. Jesus is not pre-existent and non-Jews cannot be Christians.

You can't honestly take the excuse "we burned most of the original Christian's texts so they don't count".

Your head. Paul admits he wasn't until post Christ death's, James was one earlier. James says his Christianity is different than Paul's. That right there is James being both older and different. For fuck sakes who do you think made the first teachings of Jesus? Was it Paul or Jesus himself?

File: 1385342636625.jpg (53KB, 510x370px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 510x370px

>>981735

>KJV

>>986356
What's wrong with KJV?

File: 1460402902670.jpg (89KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 500x500px

>>986356

>>986575
this

File: NOPENOPENOPE.jpg (7KB, 355x142px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 355x142px

>see thread
>~300 posts

Oh dis gon' be gud

>40 posters

Fuck.

>almost through the entire thread
>turns into shroud thread

Nope. Fuck this. Nope. Fuck y'all. It's almost 1 AM. Why the fuck am I doing this? Nope. Fuck this. Bonne nuit, faggots.