Shroud of Turin debate
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-06-2016, 01:32 PM
RE: Shroud of Turin debate
(20-06-2016 12:33 PM)SitaSky Wrote:  Anything from his hair, blood or skin should test as male, this isn't hard to understand, if his blood is showing as female than Jesus was a woman...

He was obviously transgender. Not having an actual father he could not have an X chromosome and had to be female. Maybe that makes up for Eve being transgender since the rib she was made from would have been XY.

Or perhaps the nomadic tribesmen who wrote the stories didn't know much about how genetics work.

Quote:or the shroud is fake, you gotta pick one.

why not both?

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-06-2016, 01:43 PM (This post was last modified: 20-06-2016 02:04 PM by SitaSky.)
RE: Shroud of Turin debate
(20-06-2016 01:32 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(20-06-2016 12:33 PM)SitaSky Wrote:  Anything from his hair, blood or skin should test as male, this isn't hard to understand, if his blood is showing as female than Jesus was a woman...

He was obviously transgender. Not having an actual father he could not have an X chromosome and had to be female. Maybe that makes up for Eve being transgender since the rib she was made from would have been XY.

Or perhaps the nomadic tribesmen who wrote the stories didn't know much about how genetics work.

Quote:or the shroud is fake, you gotta pick one.

why not both?

That's a good point, Jesus could be a woman and the shroud is fake but I don't even know if this Jesus person was even a real historical rabbi who went around performing miracles but let's say he was, the shroud is still fake. I just love how they have to make an excuse "The virgin birth was a miracle! He couldn't have male blood right? It's unique to him because he was unique, right?" I guess so but why doesn't he have male blood? He is still a male, it just makes no sense scientifically but they do try so hard to make it scientific.

[Image: sagansig_zps6vhbql6m.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-06-2016, 05:22 PM
RE: Shroud of Turin debate
(20-06-2016 01:32 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(20-06-2016 12:33 PM)SitaSky Wrote:  Anything from his hair, blood or skin should test as male, this isn't hard to understand, if his blood is showing as female than Jesus was a woman...

He was obviously transgender.

WBWJU?
[Image: il_fullxfull.677403743_layq.jpg]

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Paleophyte's post
20-06-2016, 06:14 PM
RE: Shroud of Turin debate
Fucking jesus never saw a toilet seat.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-06-2016, 07:23 PM
RE: Shroud of Turin debate
The Shroud of Turin has been scientifically debunked numerous times by various scientists the world over as a hoax. The Shroud is a medieval artifact and intentional forgery of the supposed First Century burial cloth of Jesus Christ. The Shroud was created by an artist to lure faithful fourteenth century pilgrims to visit a relic displayed for the purpose of encouraging their religious faith and soliciting their monetary offerings.

This site makes for interesting reading too; it's about religious cloth folding, or tetradiplonhttp://freeinquiry.com/skeptic/shroud/ar.../index.htm

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes SYZ's post
27-07-2016, 12:29 PM (This post was last modified: 27-07-2016 12:35 PM by Deltabravo.)
RE: Shroud of Turin debate
I find this debate highly amusing.

The most obvious way to get the image of a dead man on a piece of linen is to put a piece of linen over a dead man and leave it in the sun, and for the sweat and dirt off the body to leave an image.

Those who say this is not a death shroud have to say it is an elaborate hoax, and then construct ridiculous ways of creating it.

Then they do a 3D reconstruction and, hey, guess what, it's an old guy. So, when they do a film about this, they have to take the actual image of what they find and make it look much younger, so it's Jesus. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMCOyFjeycg

What's also funny is that if it is "Jesus" then it is the same age of the man described by, yes, wait for it, Ralph Ellis, as being Jesus. What a laugh.

The point being, if some hardly known preacher died and was wrapped up, then got up and ran off, leaving his shroud, probably the shroud would not have survived. If it was the shroud of a very high ranking member of an aristocratic family, it's more likely that someone would have preserved it. If it was a shroud of a high ranking aristocrat, then the age is likely to be of an older man. If it was an older member of an aristocratic family, then it's more likely that the identification of it is correct and that it is the shroud of someone who was called Jesus.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2016, 01:28 PM
RE: Shroud of Turin debate
No debate. I don't even care if that fake was really found in Israel, it wasn't but who cares? It still would not mean babies could be born without a second set of DNA and it also would not mean you could have all the blood drained out of your body, suffer complete organ and brain death only to magically survive rigor mortis 3 days later.

That fake was manufactured after the fact to market to get new members. It is certainly obvious a person or group of people started Christianity, otherwise it would not exist. But there was no magic baby or magic man involved. Christianity did not grow because of a sky hero who cloned himself, it grew because the splinter Jews merely got tired of the old ways and got popularized by Roman's perceptions of the early Christians persecution.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Brian37's post
27-07-2016, 09:56 PM
RE: Shroud of Turin debate
(27-07-2016 12:29 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  I find this debate highly amusing.

The most obvious way to get the image of a dead man on a piece of linen is to put a piece of linen over a dead man and leave it in the sun, and for the sweat and dirt off the body to leave an image.

Those who say this is not a death shroud have to say it is an elaborate hoax, and then construct ridiculous ways of creating it.

Then they do a 3D reconstruction and, hey, guess what, it's an old guy. So, when they do a film about this, they have to take the actual image of what they find and make it look much younger, so it's Jesus. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMCOyFjeycg

What's also funny is that if it is "Jesus" then it is the same age of the man described by, yes, wait for it, Ralph Ellis, as being Jesus. What a laugh.

The point being, if some hardly known preacher died and was wrapped up, then got up and ran off, leaving his shroud, probably the shroud would not have survived. If it was the shroud of a very high ranking member of an aristocratic family, it's more likely that someone would have preserved it. If it was a shroud of a high ranking aristocrat, then the age is likely to be of an older man. If it was an older member of an aristocratic family, then it's more likely that the identification of it is correct and that it is the shroud of someone who was called Jesus.

Your last paragraph ends in a non sequitur.

Regardless, the shroud is of Medieval origin.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
29-07-2016, 04:00 AM
RE: Shroud of Turin debate
Shroud of turin is a fake. Pope Francis says it is a fake. The church says it is a fake.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/10/14/world/...entic.html


The End.

...What debate?


My Youtube channel if anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEkRdbq...rLEz-0jEHQ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-08-2016, 10:59 AM
RE: Shroud of Turin debate
Didn't the Discovery Channel or National Geographic broadcast a documentary in which the closest one of their invited boffins got to reproducing this sort of image involved photochemical legerdemain that could have been carried out as long ago as the sixteenth-century?

You're right. It's such a transparently fraudulent piece of nonsense that only the most credulous drongo would imagine it's someone's shroud.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: