Shroud of Turin is from first AD.

[KWED]

I made no claim,

Yes you did! You said...
"the study of the teaching is up to me, but I can get strenght from God in the prosess"
The bit in bold is the positive claim you made about the process of studying scripture.

I said what my personal belief is.

You claimed a real world outcome from your belief.

You on the other hand assume you know what I believe or should believe. That is on you not me

No. As has been explained many times, you don't always understand what other people are saying, or even what you say yourself.

 

[KWED]

Only a few humans will ever realize enlightenment. I am probably not one of them.

"Enlightenment" is a subjective concept. Even the definition is subjective. You can call yourself enlightened if you want to.

 

[KWED]

No, I never mentioned anything about what you should believe?

Now you are going in circles. It's been established you have personal beliefs. The thing I have been asking is if you believe them to be real do you have evidence? As well as several other questions, all avoided here.

I have been through this at length elsewhere with @Seeker of White Light. He struggles to understand the difference between "telling you what you believe" and "asking what you base your claims on" or "pointing out flaws in your argument".

 

[joelr]

Evidence of my personal belief? You do know spiritual faith is a belief and not science?

I think you mean religious faith? Spirituality isn't a faith based word. And yes, faith isn't a good path to truth. Do you care if your beliefs are true? People have faith in race superiority and all types of Gods and cults.

 

[joelr]

I believe it to be true

Yes and what is your evidence. Beliefs are not evidence as clearly there are thousands of different beliefs in supernatural things. Heavens Gate believed if they all died their soul would enter a ufo near Saturn. So they all died. Do you care if your beliefs are true? There are many stories about Gods, if you believe in one you probably find the others to be false. So why would you think your version is true? Or do you not care?
Can you explain why you are looking for enlightenment if you are not Buddhist? That is not the point of Christianity?

 

[joelr]

I have been through this at length elsewhere with @Seeker of White Light. He struggles to understand the difference between "telling you what you believe" and "asking what you base your claims on" or "pointing out flaws in your argument".

Yeah I'm getting that also. I thought people come here to discuss beliefs? Not sure what's happening there?

 

[paarsurrey]

Shroud of Turin is from first AD.

I couldn't follow the thread.
Is it the shroud in which Jesus was wrapped, for treatment of wounds inflicted on his body, in the tomb of Joseph Arimathea, please? Right?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Shroud of Turin is from first AD.

I couldn't follow the thread.
Is it the shroud in which Jesus was wrapped, for treatment of wounds inflicted on his body, in the tomb of Joseph Arimathea, please? Right?

Anybody, please

Regards

 

[Ashoka]

Shroud of Turin is from first AD.

I couldn't follow the thread.
Is it the shroud in which Jesus was wrapped, for treatment of wounds inflicted on his body, in the tomb of Joseph Arimathea, please? Right?

Regards

It's supposedly his burial shroud.

 

[paarsurrey]

It's supposedly his burial shroud.

" burial shroud"

I don't agree with the above, please.
It is impossible to be a "burial" shroud as Yeshua's friends knew for sure that though Yeshua was seriously injured yet very much alive, so neither they gave Yeshua a burial bath nor they performed the burial service, one understands , please. Right?
If yes, then anybody kindly quote as to when Yeshua was given the burial/funeral bath and when his funeral service was performed and who lead it, please? Right?
Isn't (Jesus') Yeshua's death on the Cross sheerly faked by Hellenist Paul for his own ulterior motives, it transpires, please? Right?

Regards

 

[Brian2]

" burial shroud"

I don't agree with the above, please.
It is impossible to be a "burial" shroud as Yeshua's friends knew for sure that though Yeshua was seriously injured yet very much alive, so neither they gave Yeshua a burial bath nor they performed the burial service, one understands , please. Right?
If yes, then anybody kindly quote as to when Yeshua was given the burial/funeral bath and when his funeral service was performed and who lead it, please? Right?
Isn't (Jesus') Yeshua's death on the Cross sheerly faked by Hellenist Paul for his own ulterior motives, it transpires, please? Right?

Regards

The burial happened on the Friday afternoon and was a hurried event because of the law about not working on the sabbath, after sunset. The women Jesus knew went to see where He was buried and decided to come back on the Sunday to clean and wrap the body in the spices properly.
It was not Paul who wrote about the death and burial of Jesus. Paul did not write a gospel of course.

 

[Subduction Zone]

" burial shroud"

I don't agree with the above, please.
It is impossible to be a "burial" shroud as Yeshua's friends knew for sure that though Yeshua was seriously injured yet very much alive, so neither they gave Yeshua a burial bath nor they performed the burial service, one understands , please. Right?
If yes, then anybody kindly quote as to when Yeshua was given the burial/funeral bath and when his funeral service was performed and who lead it, please? Right?
Isn't (Jesus') Yeshua's death on the Cross sheerly faked by Hellenist Paul for his own ulterior motives, it transpires, please? Right?

Regards

The Shroud of Turin has been shown to be a fake several times over. But that fact that that artifact is fraudulent does not refute the Gospel story. History tends to do that.

 

[Brian2]

The Shroud of Turin has been shown to be a fake several times over. But that fact that that artifact is fraudulent does not refute the Gospel story. History tends to do that.

Even more intrigue about the shroud.
New Analysis Dates Shroud of Turin to the First Century - Associates for Biblical Research

 

[Subduction Zone]

Even more intrigue about the shroud.
New Analysis Dates Shroud of Turin to the First Century - Associates for Biblical Research

Not exactly what one would call a reliable source. It was recognized as a fake when it was first found. The owner was running a side biz doing miracle cures. No one can come close to refuting the C14 dating. And most recently a forensic analysis was done of the blood stains. They are not what one would expect.

Why denigrate your faith by relying on a fraud? Disproving a fraud does not refute the myth, but it does tell us about that a person that cannot accept the refutation has a rather weak faith.

 

[Brian2]

Not exactly what one would call a reliable source. It was recognized as a fake when it was first found. The owner was running a side biz doing miracle cures. No one can come close to refuting the C14 dating. And most recently a forensic analysis was done of the blood stains. They are not what one would expect.

Why denigrate your faith by relying on a fraud? Disproving a fraud does not refute the myth, but it does tell us about that a person that cannot accept the refutation has a rather weak faith.

I don't care if it is a fraud or not. It has nothing to do with my faith. I was just offering you something you may not have heard.

 

[Aupmanyav]

We know about it all this time. A new report from an interested party is not going to change our views.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't care if it is a fraud or not. It has nothing to do with my faith. I was just offering you something you may not have heard.

Oh I have heard about it.

What is rather sad about this is that one of the main opposers to the findings of STURP was a member of it. When they did their work they all agreed on where to sample etc.. The also all agreed to no private sampling. One can see why that has to be a must when you have people that might have different opinions analyzing something that they were unlikely to be able to sample again. A few years after the results came in that showed it to be a fraud, one of the men that worked on it "remembered" some samples that he had on pieces of tape. He said that those when dated with a method that does not appear to be as valid as C14 gave an older date.

The problem is that he went back on his word. He admitted to lying when he swore not to take private samples. Or perhaps he did not take private samples. At any rate he was shown to be a liar by his own claims. And once shown to be a liar his work cannot be trusted. Unfortunately until my mouse comes in tomorrow I cannot link. But if you go through this thread you can see how the claims of those that need this fraud have been debunked.
By the way, no one ever tried to claim that debunking the Shroud debunked the Jesus story. It just showed that this shroud was not his.

Also what do you think about those that try to use the fact that women being the first to see Jesus was somehow evidence that the story was true since the people of that time were so misogynistic? I always thought that it was one of the poorer arguments. Worse yet if they said that a disciple went to clean and wrap Jesus that would be evidence against the story. At that time taking care of the dead was "women's work". It was a touch of realism that kept the people of that time from rejecting the story out of hand.

 

[Brian2]

Also what do you think about those that try to use the fact that women being the first to see Jesus was somehow evidence that the story was true since the people of that time were so misogynistic? I always thought that it was one of the poorer arguments. Worse yet if they said that a disciple went to clean and wrap Jesus that would be evidence against the story. At that time taking care of the dead was "women's work". It was a touch of realism that kept the people of that time from rejecting the story out of hand.

I don't know about the report of the women first being evidence for the truth of the story even though I think that the report of women was seen as less trustworthy in those days. It did show that the women were less afraid than the men (and maybe they were less likely to be arrested for being disciples anyway) It probably is realistic if the women did that sort of thing with the bodies.
I don't know about your idea that it kept the people of the time from rejecting the story out of hand. That would be a silly reason to accept the story

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't know about the report of the women first being evidence for the truth of the story even though I think that the report of women was seen as less trustworthy in those days. It did show that the women were less afraid than the men (and maybe they were less likely to be arrested for being disciples anyway) It probably is realistic if the women did that sort of thing with the bodies.
I don't know about your idea that it kept the people of the time from rejecting the story out of hand. That would be a silly reason to accept the story

It is used by some apologists. Of course one has to lie to be an apologist and you may have forgotten that particular lie of theirs.

And no, it does not show that women were less afraid than men. It is just a story. And you did not appear to have read my post properly. Not to worry, I understand cognitive dissonance can be a problem. My point was that if the authors of those stories put in something that was culturally out of place that could have kept the story from being accepted.

 

[Brian2]

It is used by some apologists. Of course one has to lie to be an apologist and you may have forgotten that particular lie of theirs.

And no, it does not show that women were less afraid than men. It is just a story. And you did not appear to have read my post properly. Not to worry, I understand cognitive dissonance can be a problem. My point was that if the authors of those stories put in something that was culturally out of place that could have kept the story from being accepted.

I suppose it was culturally appropriate for the apostles etc whom the women told of the missing body, did not believe them.