 IndyEngineer
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 24 Posts
|
Thursday, April 22, 2010 8:53:44 PM
Fairytale |
|
 pmarren
Male, 30-39, Midwest US
3383 Posts
|
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 8:54:18 AM
What a crock of sh*t. |
|
 television17
Male, 13-17, Australia
49 Posts
|
Tuesday, April 06, 2010 1:49:48 AM
The 'Shroud of Turin' was scientifically disproved as Jesus' garb. It's all over the everywhere, and I thought someone here would have a glimmer of IQ left after browsing hundreds of "10 more of Fancy's random images he ripped by hitting random picture on Photobucket", or wherever he gets them from... |
|
 Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
9540 Posts
|
Friday, April 02, 2010 5:12:58 PM
how do they know that that shroud actually covered Jesus at one time?
They don't know. They have faith instead.
There's no way of knowing short of time travel. Even if the shroud is ~2000 years old and it is an image from a corpse, that still only narrows it down to one of a very large number of people. |
|
Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
9540 Posts
|
Friday, April 02, 2010 5:10:11 PM
Really all this proves is that the shroud of Turin could not be Jesus. The facial structure of that man doesn't look Semetic in any way, looks more European, probably Greek or Anatolian.
Do you know what Judeans of 2000 years ago looked like? If so, how? You can't simply assume a lack of change over that period of time and be sure of being right. |
|
Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
9540 Posts
|
Friday, April 02, 2010 5:07:08 PM
You do know the shroud of Turin is a hoax from the Middle Ages, right?
Are you basing that statement on the carbon dating of the sample that was later found to probably be a patch and not the original material?
If so, your knowledge is out of date.
If not, what evidence do you have? |
|
skullgrin
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
853 Posts
|
Friday, April 02, 2010 3:50:10 PM
no no no, im not talking about the real saint nick, im talking about the coke-a-cola drinking, red suit wearing, reindeer riding fat guy who slides down chimneys on x-mas eve and delivers presents to all the good little boys and girls. There is more proof that THIS guy is real, than there is for Jesus |
|
 k-two
Male, 40-49, Europe
112 Posts
|
Friday, April 02, 2010 11:32:33 AM
@skullgrin, who wrote:
"There is actually more proof that santa clause is real today in 2010 than there is that Jesus was."
Do yourself a favour and google for Nikolaus of Myra, aka Nikolaus the Saint, who in the 4th century was bishop in a region which today belongs to Turkey. He spawned many legends, and he certainly was different from what these legends (and an Atlanta based soft drink company) made of him.
Which means that your example perfectly supports what you are denying, i.e. that there is proof that a man did exist in historic Palestine whose myths outlived him by millenia - and that he was certainly different from what the legends want to make us believe.
|
|
skullgrin
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
853 Posts
|
Friday, April 02, 2010 10:32:18 AM
"i hate to be a pedant, but it's widely accepted that Jesus DID exist. i think the debate lies in whether or not he was the son of a god. there are simply too many independent historical references to him for him to have been entirely fictional."
there are zero independent historical refrences of jesus existing. ZERO, zip, zilch, nada, none. Jesus existing is not widely accepted by anyone but christians and catholics - which doesnt mean anything.
|
|
skullgrin
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
853 Posts
|
Friday, April 02, 2010 10:30:41 AM
**someone who we know that does not exist actually has MORE proof of existing than jesus. |
|
skullgrin
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
853 Posts
|
Friday, April 02, 2010 10:30:08 AM
"@skullgrin & angilion:
How about the following conclusion?
There is no proof or disproove of the biblical jesus ever existed. The character could have been entirely made up. He could have been several people whos stories got mixed together or he could have been close to what is described in the bible (with some exagaration and the usual loss between retelling and translation).
Fact is, that some decades after the alleged preachings of that jesus there were christian communities all over the then-knowen world and some centuries later christianity was the established church of the roman empire.
Quit of a success story for a fictional character. "
reminds me of someone similar. This person actually has a lot more documentation but is still known to not be real..this person, of course, is santa clause. There is actually more proof that santa clause is real today in 2010 than there is that Jesus was. Think about that for a second. someo |
|
lyckosam
Male, 18-29, Europe
193 Posts
|
Friday, April 02, 2010 9:44:05 AM
i hate to be a pedant, but it's widely accepted that Jesus DID exist. i think the debate lies in whether or not he was the son of a god. there are simply too many independent historical references to him for him to have been entirely fictional.
so he was real, but probably just a forward thinking bloke who a lot of people liked. time distorts the truth. |
|
 Link_Hiei
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
5158 Posts
|
Friday, April 02, 2010 4:58:31 AM
I think there should be something out there. It'd suck to just die and never knew you lived. That would be lame. The Christian Bible though I do not believe in.
Maybe when I die Ill appear on a planet full of pot. I'd be a good boy for that :P. |
|
osmandias
Male, 40-49, Europe
206 Posts
|
Friday, April 02, 2010 3:25:42 AM
Fact is also that we are still stuck with people who believe in this character. (which is no big deal in itself) Some of those also believe (and make it a point that the believe in christ is connect with the other believes) that creationism has to be taught at school, gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry and condoms don't help to fight aids.
Those people are the real pain in the back. |
|
osmandias
Male, 40-49, Europe
206 Posts
|
Friday, April 02, 2010 3:20:18 AM
@skullgrin & angilion:
How about the following conclusion?
There is no proof or disproove of the biblical jesus ever existed. The character could have been entirely made up. He could have been several people whos stories got mixed together or he could have been close to what is described in the bible (with some exagaration and the usual loss between retelling and translation).
Fact is, that some decades after the alleged preachings of that jesus there were christian communities all over the then-knowen world and some centuries later christianity was the established church of the roman empire.
Quit of a success story for a fictional character.
|
|
 Squinky
Female, 18-29, Australia
117 Posts
|
Friday, April 02, 2010 3:05:22 AM
Wow what a surprise, he looks like a slightly tanned white male. Considering where he was from, shouldn't his skin be a lot darker? The representation looks exactly like every other picture, painting or statue of Christ around. |
|
 yarrrpirate
Male, 18-29, Europe
397 Posts
|
Friday, April 02, 2010 2:12:01 AM
You do know the shroud of Turin is a hoax from the Middle Ages, right? |
|
 wolfguy423
Male, 18-29, Western US
143 Posts
|
Thursday, April 01, 2010 10:57:19 PM
i thought the science of it was pretty cool. |
|
 tstyblucryns
Male, 18-29, Southern US
498 Posts
|
Thursday, April 01, 2010 10:02:32 PM
"power out of his fingertips" HAHA!! |
|
 Volsunga
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
1548 Posts
|
Thursday, April 01, 2010 8:36:39 PM
Really all this proves is that the shroud of Turin could not be Jesus. The facial structure of that man doesn't look Semetic in any way, looks more European, probably Greek or Anatolian. |
|
 MandyLea
Female, 18-29, Midwest US
247 Posts
|
Thursday, April 01, 2010 7:35:08 PM
how do they know that that shroud actually covered Jesus at one time? |
|
 StarDagger
Male, 40-49, Western US
1195 Posts
|
Thursday, April 01, 2010 6:19:40 PM
Too white, anyone from that region, especially someone walking around alot in the sun would be much much darker. |
|
skullgrin
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
853 Posts
|
Thursday, April 01, 2010 6:18:34 PM
of course i do, but that is irrelevant in this discussion seeing as were discussing the jesus from the bible* |
|
skullgrin
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
853 Posts
|
Thursday, April 01, 2010 6:18:16 PM
"The reasons Ive given so far. You dont care, so why are you asking? Just assume I've wasted my time writing several posts explaining them and you've ignored them. That saves us both time."
but none of your reasons are valid...
"We hold very different positions. You're adamant about denying even the possibility of the existence of an entirely mortal man preaching reform of an existing religion. I'm not."
um...no im not. All i said was there was no proof. Untill there is proof i will continue to deny that he existed though as there is no reason to assume he did.
"Poor use of English is a better sign."
lol, another grasp of the straws - that wont win any debates my friend.
Are you aware of the possibility of any position other than the two most extreme (absolute faith that he is God the Son and absolute faith that he never existed at all, in any form)?
Serious question.
of course |
|
skullgrin
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
853 Posts
|
Thursday, April 01, 2010 6:09:33 PM
"I can say it with a straight face because I have some understanding of the situation."
if you believe what you just said then you obviously dont...
"The Roman empire was a very literate and organised society, even more so than the Roman republic that preceeded it. We know that they kept extensive records of official business. Hardly any of those records still exist, which is hardly surprising after 2000 years."
and i'll repeat:
there was still no record of him...the most important/influential person to have ever walked the earth...and yet somehow hundreds of years later people were able to retell his story?
"There are Roman records from the mid to late 1st century. Decades later, not centuries."
and they knew his story how? If the original writers were lost how did they write about him? word of mouth? well thats not proof of anything |
|
Back to Listing
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}