The Shroud of Turin

...

Other urls found in this thread:

theweek.co.uk/89884/catholic-school-censors-suggestive-priest-statue
jthomasdevins.com/turin-shroud/
youtube.com/watch?v=5MoDMrcXXj8
youtube.com/watch?v=s-jENDPF8UE
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

how am i supposed to fap to a pick that small?

That piece of cloth that was dated back to the Middle Ages? What about it?

...

nice try

It dates to the 1st century. Patched up sections date to the Middle Ages as that's when it was patched up.

...

that lying neanderthal kike face

it's your god!

Good thing I was able to verify u are the real wolf heim with your code

The Monk of AU what delivers Bread to the Kids....

>Sources are literally a shill site for the Shroud

kek

Slide thread confirmed. Sage.

story is HERE LMAO!

theweek.co.uk/89884/catholic-school-censors-suggestive-priest-statue

if the bible says long hair on a man is an abomination, why is The shroud's image of a long haired man?

Desperate Christians just will not accept the fact that the shroud of Turin was thoroughly debunked years sago.

just one more...

>citation is people who believe claim is correct
>so I'll dismiss it wholesale

>implying it wouldn't look like this

The biggest giveaway is that jeebus is cupping his bollocks.
A true shroud would have part of his wang hanging out, but we canny have the son of god with his tallywacker on show, so they made him look divine in the forgery.
L2logic

I wanna puke on this jewish sack of filth

>people look up a rough idea of what people in Jesus' area looked like at his time
>looks like a Greek
>people say this is a reconstruction of Jesus

Despite your interest in attacking it and Christian stuff, the Shroud of Turin was not debunked. It was affirmed as properly dated to the first century. And the Bible does not say long hair on a man is an abomination but a disgrace to the man. But please tell me if you know what the standards of length were at the time period.

>we should be ruled over by inbred retards
>because God says they're better than us
Damn, Wolfy, you dumb.
>the Shroud of Turin was not debunked. It was affirmed as properly dated to the first century
But that's a lie.

Recent studies for the shroud have actually been afiramative towards authenticity

The Shroud of Turin and the Tilma in Mexico are physical proof of Jesus and Mary. They are real, and un-explainable.

The atheists want PROOF, and the Shroud is a PROOF.

And then they reject it!

Fools

I love how the entire premise of your epic screencrap is that opponents accuse the shroud to be an artistic forgery and not the result of a very orthodox reenactment of the passion, possibly taking place in Jerusalem or using an antique coat from the region, as was very very common place in the medieval era.

When you actually consider the possibility of a fanatic reenactment your entire 'omg so redpilled wake up athist sheepel' completely flops.

I don't expect you to argue back.

Literally addressed in the epic screencap

>But that's a lie.
The most popular cited study that dated it to the medieval era was thought to have been examining not a piece of the original cloth but a bit of the medieval patchwork done to it. This was affirmed by later tests that date other parts of the shroud to the 1st century and bear plant remains standard to 1st century Jewish funeral ceremonies.

The medieval dating has been debunked and the claim of a hoax is absolute ridiculousness peddled by anti-theists.

>When you actually consider the possibility of a fanatic reenactment your entire 'omg so redpilled wake up athist sheepel' completely flops.

This is explicitly brought up and rejected in the screencap based on the evidence of the situation.

Christcucks are traitors to Europe and will be slaughtered on the day of the rope. Rome fucked up by embracing Christianity, we should of stuck to burning you guys to trees and feeding you to lions.

>Feeding to lions
Something else that didnt happen

what are you talking about, you low iq english convict lmao

shut the fuck up with your stupid comment. you can only respond if you have haven't lost an emu war

Further, what reason is there to believe it? Historical claims are all probability based to begin with so a cloak seemingly impossible to fake dating to the right time with the correct torture methods down to every detail that it unique to itself historically would show we have every reason to think it was probably Jesus' shroud and little to no reason to think otherwise.

I've got a splinter of the True Cross to sell
You interested?

jthomasdevins.com/turin-shroud/

The Shroud is real.

Jesus attained what Buddhists call the "Rainbow Body". This is possible for anyone who knows how.

>secret knowledge
user pls
>this guy

Hand waived =/= Disproved

His fallacious premise is that since the shroud is older and carries traces from the middle east it couldn't possibly have been a reenactment. It's as if antic relics didn't exist at the time and passion reenactment wasn't seen as a divine ritual worth mimicking to the last possible detail.

>down to every detail that it unique to itself historically
yeah it's almost like we aren't getting it from one big book and preserved Roman testimonies they had access to in the middle ages

Showed evidence that would reject the claim =/= hand-waived.
>It's as if antic relics didn't exist at the time and passion reenactment wasn't seen as a divine ritual worth mimicking to the last possible detail.
It literally wasn't. You have zero reason to think it is false. All evidence points to it being the real thing.
Skepticism without reason is tantamount to denial, user.

The really amusing part is there's an Masonic Templar Triangle at the focal point of that Altar.

I just love it!

A 3D face could never leave a 2D print like that in a shroud

Yeah, it really shows how ideas move throughout time. It is originally an Eye of Providence before things such as the Masons or Templar existed though.

"Either the shroud is authentic... or it is a product of human artifice... Is there a possible third hypothesis? No, and here's why. Both Wilson and Stevenson and Habermas go to great lengths to demonstrate that the man imaged on the shroud must be Jesus Christ and not someone else. After all, the man on this shroud was flogged, crucified, wore a crown of thorns, did not have his legs broken, was nailed to the cross, had his side pierced, and so on. Stevenson and Habermas even calculate the odds as 1 in 83 million that the man on the shroud is not Jesus Christ... I agree with them on all of this. If the shroud is authentic, the image is that of Jesus."

t. Atheist and Shroud critic Steven Schafersman

They had blankets back then?

No way

>this user
This is too silly a comment. I'll redirect you to

How come out of all the relics of Christ: The crown of thorns, Holy grail, spear of destiny, ect we only have this shroud and some dubious splinters from the one true cross?

I thought this was going to be about Turin Turambar. I really need to go to sleep.

Confirmed to be fake in 1997.

You're outdated. See For easy access to full details, check out user's post here

>Showed evidence that would reject the claim =/= hand-waived.
The only moment he addressed it was when he built a strawman 'b-but what if it was a random corpse'.
No one is saying that. Every reasonable person who has delved on the subject knows it couldn't have been an artist or just some dead pauper.
You can't prove it wasn't an accurate reenactment, FUCK reenactments, AKA larping the death of Christ, is a huge part of traditional Christianity. That's enough of an evidence to tip the burden of proof back to the superstitious camp (tho I know Christians on Sup Forums are former fedora tipping atheist who are in it for other reasons than bonna fide magical sky daddies belief)

>It literally wasn't.
Are you fucking stupid? Antique relics and even secular objects circulated left and right in the middle ages. How the fuck can you even believe that they disintegrated themselves for an entire millennium?

Muslims they destroyed or stole many holy relics during the Crusades. We have the spear of destiny though.

Who says that its Jesus and not just his neighbour or the local green grocer?

...

>the rainbow body
Gay pride?

>or it is a product of human artifice
Entirely plausible considering old christianity was a lot more hardcore than the current watered down version.
Just a century ago it was still common practice for more devoted followers to flagellate themselves with a spiked chain whenever they had remotely sinned.

i'm not seeing Mary Magdalene on that list.
Why user?

>No one is saying that.
That's basically what you're arguing and but with the added detail that the random corpse was a guy deliberately reinacting everything in the same time period with the same funeral practices and Roman tools.

>You can't prove it wasn't an accurate reenactment
Nor do I have any reason to think it is one. LARPing the passion is not at all common or even noted in the early church period so your evidence is just your imagination.

>That's enough of an evidence to tip the burden of proof back to the superstitious camp
Way to make it apparent that you're deliberately trying to play sides...
>Christians on Sup Forums are former fedora tipping atheist who are in it for other reasons than bonna fide magical sky daddies belief
...and have ill-intent.

>Are you fucking stupid?
Mate, the "it" in "it literally wasn't" is singular. I'm not talking about something plural such as relics if I'm using singular words. Learn a book, m8.

Not at all possible given the evidence in >Just a century ago it was still common practice for more devoted followers to flagellate themselves with a spiked chain whenever they had remotely sinned.
This is untrue. The self-flagellation movement was from the 13th to 14th century and was deemed heretical by the Catholic Church.

Hoax.

M8 where I live people claim to see jesus in burnt tortillas and scraped walls.

Youll excuse me if I remain skeptic.

I'm not telling you to not be skeptical. I'm telling you to look at the evidence and not be so crude.

>anti-theists taking the most ridiculous options to refute what they don't like

youtube.com/watch?v=5MoDMrcXXj8

>if the bible says long hair on a man is an abomination
The bible doesn't say that, you fucking idiot. Not ANYWHERE. It says men should not grow their hair as long as women around them do. Jesus did not grow his hair as long as the women of his land did.
You fucking athiotard kikes are such easy targets because you're so fucking stupid!

see

>this blanket is proof jesus revived

Maybe he interacted with it before dying, three days are way out of the resolution of those tests.

>keep getting (you)s from Wolf

blood could have been added later on top using a mold

>we don't have a souvenier of Christ from when he died
>I know, let's kill someone in the exact same way he died, wrap him up in a towel, leave it there for three days, remove the body, and keep the towel!
>brilliant!
What? Why would anybody go out of their way to murder someone just to praise the life of Christ in the form of a shroud?
>faggot

...

>What? Why would anybody go out of their way to murder someone just to praise the life of Christ in the form of a shroud?

You'd be surprised how far some people would go

a shroud debate would clearly go to not /x/

Maybe Protestants would but the Catholic church wouldn't

>this blanket is proof jesus revived
What
The claim is this shroud is the one Jesus was buried in. Nothing else. We're not trying to prove the resurrection, his baptism, or whatever else. I don't know why you are making this ridiculous comments.
One more for you.

The 7th-8th post in the screencap I linked you to shows the requirements needed for a forgery. Stop just spouting stuff.

Thats what the infographic states at the end.

Also its far, far more likely a bum was wrapped in it than jesus
Or anyone else fpr that matter

nice. the modern spin would be the crowd is all looking at their phones.

Sure you mean like a catholic priest wouldn't sell salvation notes for those that could afford it. Fr. Billy Mays: Sin all you want but wait there's more. For the low price of $19.99 I have these spectacular space age technology salvation notes. Never go to hell ever again.

>Thats what the infographic states at the end.
But never actually argues for so I'm not sure why you treat it like an argument for it.
>Also its far, far more likely a bum was wrapped in it than jesus
This is explicitly rejected in the screencap and made a major topic of the post. You've already been refuted if you bothered to look at it.

Fun fact: The second guy from the furthest right in the crowd is a self-portrait of the artist himself: Norman Rockwell.

I've actually seen it and let me tell you its a miracle it survived the fire

The testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ is His sure Word of prophecy, all He has said has come to pass and will come to pass

>That's basically what you're arguing (You) and (You) but with the added detail that the random corpse was a guy deliberately reinacting everything in the same time period with the same funeral practices and Roman tools.
So basically not the same thing at all. Not even remotely.

>LARPing the passion is not at all common
I'm starting to believe you aren't even christian.

>This is untrue. The self-flagellation movement was from the 13th to 14th century
Do you even know what a Cilice belt is? That's the softened remains of it that's still occasional practiced today by the more faithfuls.

but you also ironically proved yourself wrong
>In the 13th century, a group of Roman Catholics, known as the Flagellants, took this practice to its extreme ends.
Makes the hypothesis of a reenactment ever more believable.

Quit larping being a christian and go back to tipping your fucking fedora.

Actually this was happening and it was what caused Martin Luther to thoroughly separate from the Catholic Church

Are reformed Atheists having a field trip today? Fanatical reenactments to the point of grievous injuries and even death were not unheard of in the medieval era and still happens today (tho now they are given the euphemism 'stigmata').

You don't know shit. Get the fuck out.

Why are you discussing carbon credits?

Anyway thanks for the heads up on the image. I really wanted the pro-photography method but couldn't remember where I had seen it. I like that method.

youtube.com/watch?v=s-jENDPF8UE

As for arguing the age issue, I highly disagree. It's coming more and more to light finally that we were much much more advanced than we were thousands of years ago. I'm sure we are being bullshitted on the medieval period as well.

youtube.com/watch?v=s-jENDPF8UE

fpbp

Honestly embarrassing. You've willfully admitted the fact that a reenactment would have had to have taken place during the time of Jesus Christ. amazing how quickly atheists turn into anti-science retards

>The church that elected a daughter fucking openly depraved Lunatic once for the position of pope and let his dynasty sow terror across the Vatican states.
>The church that still shelters pedophile priests
>The church that even the former pope admitted was controlled by a powerful inner circle of hedonistic homosexuals

>So basically not the same thing at all. Not even remotely.
It's "random corpse" and "random corpse that was prepared the same way". These are extremely similar and arguably the additions in the latter are implied in the former.

>I'm starting to believe you aren't even christian.
Okay but do tell when you have arguments.

>Do you even know what a Cilice belt is?
Not flagellation.

>but you also ironically proved yourself wrong
>Makes the hypothesis of a reenactment ever more believable.
Really not sure if you're paying attention to this at all but the appearance of a 13-14th century movement does not explain the practice of self-sacrifice and flagellation in the 1st century.

>admitted
meant ommited

>You've willfully admitted the fact that a reenactment would have had to have taken place during the time of Jesus Christ.
Where the fuck did I even say that.

You should check if they have a free room at the nearby mental war.

Jesus is real and God regardless of a shroud

...

>Really not sure if you're paying attention to this at all but the appearance of a 13-14th century movement does not explain the practice of self-sacrifice and flagellation in the 1st century.
You understand the hypothesis is that it was reenacted later on during the late middle ages using an old coat, possible somewhere in the middle east right? You understand that this is word for word what I wrote in my previous post. Not that it was actually performed during the 1th century.

You're only pretending to be illiterate right?

>You understand the hypothesis is that it was reenacted later on during the late middle ages using an old coat, possible somewhere in the middle east right?
And to direct you to the beginning of the thread, the study saying it was a middle age forgery were found out to be studying a bit of medieval patchwork and not the original cloth whole weave and dating is shown to be the 1st century.

The hypothesis was rejected several times earlier in the thread and almost first thing in the screencap. I wasn't aware you were behind.

>a very orthodox reenactment of the passion, possibly taking place in Jerusalem or using an antique coat from the region, as was very very common place in the medieval era.
>common place in the medieval era
>medieval era
>medieval

"whose weave", I mean. My apologies.

>neanderthal kike
damn it's amazing how these memes travel so fast

Considering my point was that disproving it wasn't an artistic forgery (something few people beyond axe grinding atheists ever claimed) doesn't actually disprove that it wasn't a bloody reenactment as was common during that period, I would say you're the one hopelessly behind.

You sincerily believe you can possibly trace a two thousand y/o shitstained blanket back to jesus?

are you fucking retarded?

I put together that screenshot with the sole purpose of spreading this proof of Christianity.
With that said, I have since decided not to be a Christian, though the proof of their god is substantial.

None of us expect you to understand the scientific methods used to determine the veracity of the claims regarding the Shroud of Turin.

> I have since decided not to be a Christian
Why?