for those seeking historical, archeological confirmation..

[ironglow]

    Christianity is the faith that says..."check us out, historically and archaeologically." If anyone doubts that, check the others out by the same
     measure.

  I personally, have long believed that as the time for His return draws closer, that we will find more proofs revealed.  These will be revealed to   
    bring about the final harvest of  souls, before His return...a "last chance" for the refuseniks, if you will.

  Here, in a video are a list of the top 10 more recent archaeological discoveries that reinforce the accuracy of our Bible.

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_68KfQFICg
 
   I am not a booster of "relics", but I have been observing the studies done on their number 1, and am inclined to concur.   Not sure I would place it
    as #1, ahead of the dead sea scrolls ...But we must put aside any prejudices when honestly viewing evidence.

[darkgael]

The Shroud has remained the center of controversy since its appearance in 1354.

[Dee]

The Shroud has remained the center of controversy since its appearance in 1354.

Agreed. There is nothing supporting "the shroud". It's all pure speculation.

[ironglow]

The Shroud has remained the center of controversy since its appearance in 1354.

Agreed. There is nothing supporting "the shroud". It's all pure speculation.

 Did you even glance at the information presented in the link?    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_68KfQFICg

  There is much more research evidence out there, which one reasonably should perhaps examine before passing judgememt.

    It is getting to the point that there is so much positive evidence out there, by scientists and non-RC theologians, that it is becoming more
  difficult, day by day, to deny.  Not just pipsqueak scientists, but science of the Oak Ridge level.

      Here, toward the end of the video, you can see a recreation of Jesus' face , taken by computer, from the 3D image on the cloth..
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bxBDb5BWCA

  One more of many:    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVeZKQLyYKI

   

[Dee]

The Shroud has remained the center of controversy since its appearance in 1354.

Agreed. There is nothing supporting "the shroud". It's all pure speculation.

 Did you even glance at the information presented in the link?    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_68KfQFICg

  There is much more research evidence out there, which one reasonably should perhaps examine before passing judgememt.

    It is getting to the point that there is so much positive evidence out there, by scientists and non-RC theologians, that it is becoming more
  difficult, day by day, to deny.  Not just pipsqueak scientists, but science of the Oak Ridge level.

      Here, toward the end of the video, you can see a recreation of Jesus' face , taken by computer, from the 3D image on the cloth..
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bxBDb5BWCA

  One more of many:    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVeZKQLyYKI

 

I have watched NUMEROUS documentaries on the shroud, along with quite a few articles concerning the shroud. NONE OF THEM CATHOLIC. Also I have read numerous articles concerning the "Shroud of Turin".

You say artificial intelligence, or "computer enhancement" has recreated Jesus' face. Really? AI has recreated the face of Jesus?

Considering what scripture says about that very issue, tells me that you don't necessarily believe all scripture to be the word of God Himself.

[ironglow]

  From Dee;
  "
You say artificial intelligence, or "computer enhancement" has recreated Jesus' face. Really? AI has recreated the face of Jesus?"

  Nope..no enhancement, just computer verifying a 3D likeness. No AI involved, this was done before AI came into the picture.

   Studying a well made topographical map, is a simple explanation of the methodology.

[Dee]

  From Dee;
  "
You say artificial intelligence, or "computer enhancement" has recreated Jesus' face. Really? AI has recreated the face of Jesus?"

  Nope..no enhancement, just computer verifying a 3D likeness. No AI involved, this was done before AI came into the picture.

   Studying a well made topographical map, is a simple explanation of the methodology.

How do they know what Jesus looked like? Answer: They don't. No one has, or will see the Saviours face until death comes calling.

A "knight" by the name of Geoffroi de Charnay showed up with the thing in 1354 and nobody really knows where he got it.There's no DNA to be found anywhere on the thing, and there isn't any forensic proof that it was even used as a burial shroud.
This is one of your smellier loads of horse hockey you've tried to promote as "biblical truth" , and it provides ZERO historical,or archeological confirmation of anything.

But as a shady old used car salesman once said: THERE'S A SUCKER FOR EVERY SEAT COVER.

[darkgael]

A "knight" by the name of Geoffroi de Charnay showed up with the thing in 1354 and nobody really knows where he got. There's no DNA to be found anywhere on the thing, and there isn't any forensic proof that it was even used as a burial shroud. This is one of your smellier loads of horse hockey you've tried to promote as "biblical truth" , and it provides ZERO historical,or archeological confirmation of anything.

One has to wonder where the thing was for the thirteen CENTURIES between .the burial and its appearance in the fourteenth

[Dee]

A "knight" by the name of Geoffroi de Charnay showed up with the thing in 1354 and nobody really knows where he got. There's no DNA to be found anywhere on the thing, and there isn't any forensic proof that it was even used as a burial shroud. This is one of your smellier loads of horse hockey you've tried to promote as "biblical truth" , and it provides ZERO historical,or archeological confirmation of anything.

One has to wonder where the thing was for the thirteen CENTURIES between .the burial and its appearance in the fourteenth

Precisely. It's a "Catholic relic" dredged up from an unknown origin and like many such "relics" suspect on its best day. The claim concerning the shroud,  along with the thread title, is disingenuous as neither can be connected to documented Christian archeology, and also confirms nothing concerning Christianity.

While Catholics treat it as "a relic" the Vatican is squeamish about calling it such, and opts to call it "an icon" , basically dodging its unproveable authenticity.

https://www.history.com/news/shroud-turin-forensic-study-not-jesus-burial-cloth

[ironglow]

  From DG;

  "One has to wonder where the thing was for the thirteen CENTURIES between .the burial and its appearance in the fourteenth"
 

   Did you take the time to watch the videos provided, or look for other confirmation?   If you had researched just a bit, you would find that it has been
  held by a private family until it was turned over to the RC Church in the 1300s. 

  At that time, who else would the family turn it over to, since no other denominations were established enough to take charge of it?

  I'm not saying it was the descendants of Joseph or Arimethia..although the original shroud would have likely been returned to him, since the burial shroud at that time, was a single purpose garment. It was very costly, and since Jesus did not use it for a full night, very reusable.(Re:  Mark 15:46)

    No, I am not saying we should venerate any relic..since that would be a mistake.  However, if we can drop our prejudice and look at the studies, perhaps we could learn something from it! 
   Among archaeological finds, this is one of the most analyzed, researched and studied.
    https://www.museumofthebible.org/events/shroud-of-mystery-the-worlds-most-analyzed-artifact

  Keep in mind, the old boys in charge of it, didn't ask for such an analysis, until some atheists, along with some actual scientists, brought pressure
   to bear.

  While I have little time for most such "relics", with the amount of research done on this item. and the conversions that have come about among investigators of it, seems a salient point to this discussion.

  To simply pass it off as a "Catholic thing", would be inviting an unlearned attitude.  Who do you suppose, preserved much of the received text,
   that was used to compile our current Bible?
 
  If anyone harbors ill will toward Roman Catholics, they can resort to the old adage that "even a blind hog, gets an acorn, now and then".

    There is no need to simply cast off any opportunity to actually learn something from archaeological items.
   

[ironglow]

  BTW;
   I realize it seems illogical that a single family could have retained such an item throughout the dark ages, but having lived in Europe for some time,
  I came to understand that they have a different view of permanence, than we in America do.

  Families there, have remained in the same village or city for many generations..while here, for a family to remain it the same town..or the same
  house for 3-4 generations is rare.

   For example, the Eltz family moved into their new castle (burg) in the 1100s...and still live there today.  Of course, they use only a few of the 80+ rooms for themselves..but the rest  helps to maintain the building by way of tourist fees.

  They were fortiunate that being in a remote corner, th evarious wars since, seem to have flowed around the habitation, sparing it's destruction.

  It is highly likely that such a family as the Eltz family still holds some very early historical items..  See Burg Eltz below.

[Dixie-Dude]

Catholic relics are just that, relics.  No real proof of anything.  Archeology has proven the existince of Ur, Nineveh, and Babylon.  All were considered Biblical fables 100 year ago.  Same with Troy.  They have found chariot copper hubs and spokes in the Gulf of Aqaba, in the shallow part.  The Gulf of Aquba is off the Red Sea.  The copper hubs coincide with the time of Moses and coming out of Eqypt. 

Also, all ancient civilizations, even in China and India, Egypt and Mesopotamia speak of a great flood that covered the earth. 

[Dee]

[

One has to wonder where the thing was for the thirteen CENTURIES between .the burial and its appearance in the fourteenth
[/quote]

A valid, but unanswerable question. Nobody knows where it came from, or where Charnay found it. To accept such is things with ZERO HISTORY of origin is an attempt at injecting spectulatory items into some sort of christian scenario where it has no place. It is indeed "a catholic thing" that even the Vatican is reluctant to deem it authentic, but to question a blacksmith in NYS knows better.

It is continually referd to by him as "an archeological find" when it is no such thing. It was owned by a "knight" whose list of skills included "a professional jouster", and offered no explanation of how, when, or where, he aquired it.

The duty of a Christian is to "rightly divide the Word", not to inject unsound doctine, or "mythical objects" into God's message.

[Dee]

  BTW;
   I realize it seems illogical that a single family could have retained such an item throughout the dark ages, but having lived in Europe for some time,
  I came to understand that they have a different view of permanence, than we in America do.

  Families there, have remained in the same village or city for many generations..while here, for a family to remain it the same town..or the same
  house for 3-4 generations is rare.

   For example, the Eltz family moved into their new castle (burg) in the 1100s...and still live there today.  Of course, they use only a few of the 80+ rooms for themselves..but the rest  helps to maintain the building by way of tourist fees.

  They were fortiunate that being in a remote corner, th evarious wars since, seem to have flowed around the habitation, sparing it's destruction.

  It is highly likely that such a family as the Eltz family still holds some very early historical items..  See Burg Eltz below.

Well, you lived in Texas for a short time, so you know how Texans think, and you lived in Europe, so you know how Europeans think. Amazing.

[ironglow]

  From Dee;

   "
Well, you lived in Texas for a short time, so you know how Texans think, and you lived in Europe, so you know how Europeans think. Amazing.

  Not saying I know everything about how others think...and since I lived in Texas for a total of 3-4 years..you obviously know Texans better that I do.
 
    ..But by the same token, my  having lived in Europe for 21/2 years, and dealing with the people everyday, I may  possibly have a bit better
  grasp on their lives, than somebody who has never visited the place, even for one day.

      A thought...Spend 2 to 4 years with any company or firm...then see if you have a better grasp of it's operations, than an outsider.
 
    If one doesn't understand it's culture better than any outsider, they must be a very droll individual..

[ironglow]

  A sad situation...

  Often when some interesting subject is posted, that my ask a bit of factual reply, all one gets here are haughty retorts, with not a trace of
   critical evidence in reply.

  ..No intellectual exchange...just flat denials..based upon 

[GTS225]

Anybody suppose that maybe "we" aren't supposed to know?

Consider this about the shroud..........Suppose, (for a minute), that it is the genuine article.  IF there is an all-powerful, omnipotent being, and HE doesn't want us to know anything about that article, you suppose he could alter things just a bit to make us unable to accurately carbon date it?

We've had, what,..... 3 different continents, over the decades, claim to have found the remains of Noah's Ark?  Personally, I'd have a hard time believing that the wood survived the elements for 2000 years, but then I have to refer to the above statement of mine.

And this is from a self-proclaimed agnostic.

Roger

[ironglow]

Anybody suppose that maybe "we" aren't supposed to know?

Consider this about the shroud..........Suppose, (for a minute), that it is the genuine article.  IF there is an all-powerful, omnipotent being, and HE doesn't want us to know anything about that article, you suppose he could alter things just a bit to make us unable to accurately carbon date it?

We've had, what,..... 3 different continents, over the decades, claim to have found the remains of Noah's Ark?  Personally, I'd have a hard time believing that the wood survived the elements for 2000 years, but then I have to refer to the above statement of mine.

And this is from a self-proclaimed agnostic.

Roger

   He could, but why ?  His entire word is decipherable, and He wants us to delve into His scriptures, and all related things.

    " Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." (2 Tim 2:15)

  In (1 Thess 4:13-18)  He explains that He would not have us ignorant, concerning his plan.

  Of course, this on the surface, may mean little to you, but it still stands so far as millions of others are concerned.  Keep in mind though, that "straight is the gate, and narrow the way".

  Here's hoping your curiosity will be aroused enough to approach His word with an open mind...and compare it to archaeological and historic evidence..   

      Salvation awaits.!

  ..And BTW...  Thanks for a  curious and probing discussion of the subject..

[Dee]

Anybody suppose that maybe "we" aren't supposed to know?

Consider this about the shroud..........Suppose, (for a minute), that it is the genuine article.  IF there is an all-powerful, omnipotent being, and HE doesn't want us to know anything about that article, you suppose he could alter things just a bit to make us unable to accurately carbon date it?

We've had, what,..... 3 different continents, over the decades, claim to have found the remains of Noah's Ark?  Personally, I'd have a hard time believing that the wood survived the elements for 2000 years, but then I have to refer to the above statement of mine.

And this is from a self-proclaimed agnostic.

Roger

   He could, but why ?  His entire word is decipherable, and He wants us to delve into His scriptures, and all related things.

    " Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." (2 Tim 2:15)

  In (1 Thess 4:13-18)  He explains that He would not have us ignorant, concerning his plan.

  Of course, this on the surface, may mean little to you, but it still stands so far as millions of others are concerned.  Keep in mind though, that "straight is the gate, and narrow the way".

  Here's hoping your curiosity will be aroused enough to approach His word with an open mind...and compare it to archaeological and historic evidence..   

      Salvation awaits.!

  ..And BTW...  Thanks for a  curious and probing discussion of the subject..

But AVOID wild claims of non biblical, unsubstantiated, "religious relics", that are neither historical, nor archeological in nature concerning Christianity.
And of course not all scripture is truly understood, so de aware that there are false teachers out there, so be careful of whom you listen to, and what they promote, as many will mislead you in the wrong direction.

[ironglow]

  From Dee;

  " But AVOID wild claims of non biblical, unsubstantiated, "religious relics", that are neither historical, nor archeological in nature concerning Christianity.
And of course not all scripture is truly understood, so de aware that there are false teachers out there, so be careful of whom you listen to, and what they promote, as many will mislead you in the wrong direction."

  ...And you are showing a good example of same !  ..And by all means, avoid anything that smacks of an intellectual exchange..

[Dee]

  From Dee;

  " But AVOID wild claims of non biblical, unsubstantiated, "religious relics", that are neither historical, nor archeological in nature concerning Christianity.
And of course not all scripture is truly understood, so de aware that there are false teachers out there, so be careful of whom you listen to, and what they promote, as many will mislead you in the wrong direction."

  ...And you are showing a good example of same !  ..And by all means, avoid anything that smacks of an intellectual exchange..

There is nothin "intellectual" about promoting a rag of totally unknown origin as a cloth with Jesus' face on it. Nothin!  You started out with a BS lie, and your still sticking with it, and tryin to defend it.

That's not an "intellectual exchange". That's injecting mythology into Christianity.

AND THAT'S A GOOD EXAMPLE OF FALSE TEACHINGS, AND PAGANISM. CONSTANTINE DID THE SAME THING.

You're trying to blame me for stating facts, while you promote your BS commentary of "historical, archeological confirmation". I'm defending Christiani truth, and your promoting mythology.

[ironglow]

 Nobody said anyone has to accept the subject..but just examine the evidence.. Does examining evidence scare you ?

     Sometimes folks are governed by taught in childhood prejudices..

     E.G.  .....

         The Indian wars.. some think that one side or the other is completely to blame..the other side completely innocent.

         The American civil war, that one side is completely at fault..while the other completely innocent.

     Then there is the RC Church..      Yes there is some error there...but to the hyper-legalist, NOTHING good can come out of the Catholic church..

     Early Christians it seems, had to deal with the same erroneous mindset !

        " And Nathanael said to him, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” Philip said to him, “Come and see.”  (John 1:46)

[Dee]

    Christianity is the faith that says..."check us out, historically and archaeologically." If anyone doubts that, check the others out by the same
     measure.

  I personally, have long believed that as the time for His return draws closer, that we will find more proofs revealed.  These will be revealed to   
    bring about the final harvest of  souls, before His return...a "last chance" for the refuseniks, if you will.

  Here, in a video are a list of the top 10 more recent archaeological discoveries that reinforce the accuracy of our Bible.

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_68KfQFICg
 
   I am not a booster of "relics", but I have been observing the studies done on their number 1, and am inclined to concur.   Not sure I would place it
    as #1, ahead of the dead sea scrolls ...But we must put aside any prejudices when honestly viewing evidence.

I have over the years found your eagerness to bring heresy into Christianity in an effort to appear wise, on the same level as your endorsement of known political RINOS based on statements they've made, or books they've written, while still proclaiming your a conservative.

I believe I've made my point, with the mere fact that "you concur" on this Shroud of Turin being authentic while ignoring the obvious. The "recreation of Jesus' face indeed.

[ironglow]

    Christianity is the faith that says..."check us out, historically and archaeologically." If anyone doubts that, check the others out by the same
     measure.

  I personally, have long believed that as the time for His return draws closer, that we will find more proofs revealed.  These will be revealed to   
    bring about the final harvest of  souls, before His return...a "last chance" for the refuseniks, if you will.

  Here, in a video are a list of the top 10 more recent archaeological discoveries that reinforce the accuracy of our Bible.

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_68KfQFICg
 
   I am not a booster of "relics", but I have been observing the studies done on their number 1, and am inclined to concur.   Not sure I would place it
    as #1, ahead of the dead sea scrolls ...But we must put aside any prejudices when honestly viewing evidence.

I have over the years found your eagerness to bring heresy into Christianity in an effort to appear wise, on the same level as your endorsement of known political RINOS based on statements they've made, or books they've written, while still proclaiming your a conservative.

I believe I've made my point, with the mere fact that "you concur" on this Shroud of Turin being authentic while ignoring the obvious. The "recreation of Jesus' face indeed.

   How about a bit better comprehension please?  I did not say that I concur, but that I am inclined to concur. I said that in
   the OP, hoping to generate/provoke some enlightened discussion. 

    Here is the quote:  "    I am not a booster of "relics", but I have been observing the studies done on their number 1, and am inclined
   to concur.   Not sure I would place it as #1, ahead of the dead sea scrolls ...But we must put aside any prejudices when honestly viewing
    evidence."
      The more recent studies were So, did you examine the evidence before pronouncing judgement?  Or did you just go off "half cocked", with
     no presentation of converse evidence or a critique of the scientific investigation by Los Alamos or other labs?

   All I have so far is your dogmatic denials.  Sad....
?

[Dee]

And all I have is your mile wide, inch deep, wishy washy, duckin and dodgin, on and off, denial, and crawfishin excuses and your never owningwhat you said after it doesn't fly. As usual.

So like I said, I, with your help, I have made my point. You always lean with the wind when it changes direction, and always will..

[darkgael]

mile wide, inch deep, wishy washy, duckin and dodgin, on and off, denial, and crawfishin excuses

Now…….that made me smile.

[ironglow]

mile wide, inch deep, wishy washy, duckin and dodgin, on and off, denial, and crawfishin excuses

Now…….that made me smile.

   Such a sophomoric and juvenile reply..also provided a smile for me..

[Dee]

mile wide, inch deep, wishy washy, duckin and dodgin, on and off, denial, and crawfishin excuses

Now…….that made me smile.

   Such a sophomoric and juvenile reply..also provided a smile for me..

It's just impossible to make a silk purse out of a sows ear when you have no idea WHICH SOW lost the ear. Or was it a cow? Or maybe a mule.

[ironglow]

...Couldn't be the mule, since I am dealing with the mule now..and it seems to be able to hear..or read..

   ..But like a typical mule, when it gets confused or overwhelmed..it just freezes up, stops dead..and brays !    

[Dee]

...Couldn't be the mule, since I am dealing with the mule now..and it seems to be able to hear..or read..

   ..But like a typical mule, when it gets confused or overwhelmed..it just freezes up, stops dead..and brays !    

LOL, IM BEING CALL A MULE FOR SPEAKING THE TRUTH,

WHILE AN HONEST, EDUCATED, WELL VERSED IN SCRIPTURE, CHRISTIAN WOULD NEVER ATTEMPT TO INTERTWINE A CATHOLIC RELIC WITH SCRIPTURE. WITH NO AUTHENTICATION OF ITS ORIGIN, IT JUST SHOWED UP IN SIR GALAHAD'S POSSESSION IN THE MID 1300s, NO DNA, AND ABSOLUTELY CHRONOLOGICAL HISTORY, AND VIRTUALLY NOTHIN LINKING IT TO CHRIST WHATSOEVER, BUT OUR OPED SAYS IT HAS THE FACE OF CHRIST ON IT. AND HE CONCURS IN IT BEING REAL.

SOUND PRETTY FAR FETCHED? It should. 

IT IS SAD THAT SOMEONE CLAIMING TO BE CHRISTIAN, WOULD DOGMATICALLY DEFEND AN ISSUE (ARTICLE) SO OBVIOUSLY UNATTACHED, AND AND DEVOID OF BEING CHRISTIAN RELATED. BUT EVEN IN CHRISTIANITY, FALSE TEACHERS ARE HIDING.

MYTHOLOGY, AND FABLES HAVE NO PLACE IN CHRISTIANITY OR CHRISTIAN STUDY, AND TEACHING.

TITUS CHAPTER ONE VERSE FOURTEEN    FIRST TIMOTHY CHAPTER ONE VERSUS FOUR, FIVE, SIX, AND SEVEN.