Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Shroud of Turin: Is it Authentic?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Woody View Post
    If Satan made the shroud image, he is responsible for bringing many to belief in the gospel. He is not that stupid. He's been around a while. You underestimate Satan's intelligence.
    Satan indwelled Judas Iscariot and cause him to do what he did, which set off the events that inadvertantly caused the redemption of all mankind that place their faith in Jesus for their salvation.

    I bet Satan didn't have that in his plan.

    In the end, Satan is just a pawn that God uses to work his ultimate plan.
    "I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe that I may understand: for this I also believe, that unless I believe I will not understand." --Anselm of Canterbury

    Hebrews 12:3-4
    For consider Him who endured such hostility from sinners against Himself, lest you become weary and discouraged in your souls. You have not yet resisted to bloodshed, striving against sin.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Woody View Post
      If Satan made the shroud image, he is responsible for bringing many to belief in the gospel. He is not that stupid. He's been around a while. You underestimate Satan's intelligence.

      The word is living. The books and the ink are not. It's unbelieveable that any person would read that passage and then take from it a belief that the book and the ink are alive. Gah!

      I truly cannot believe the poor quality of reasoning you guys are showing here.

      Some people keep saying that belief, arrived at by seeing evidence, is somehow invalid. That is possibly one of the most inane things I have ever heard.

      Validation through eyewitness is the very foundation of the New Testament. I challenge you to show me even one article of faith in the New Testament that was not first arrived at by personal eyewitness.

      As for the image-creation commandment; it was given to men long before God created the image of himself in Jesus. There's is a scripture passage that calls Jesus the image of the invisible God. Now, are you trying to tell me that Jesus would not have allowed anyone to look at or take pictures of his physical form, the image of the invisible God? Give me a break. If the Shroud image was also wrought by God, a copy of the original image, so that we too could have a look at God's created image of himself as the people who saw Jesus did, then how is that somehow a violation? Reasoning please, people!
      Woody, you need to stop attacking the people of God right now.
      Discernment is not knowing the difference between right and wrong. It is knowing the difference between right and almost right. - Charles H. Spurgeon

      Comment


      • Woody, you need to stop attacking the people of God right now.
        Mmm...K....
        It's a 'debate,' Anddra. Quit 'attacking' me! :-)

        Tom - I do agree with you on that...however, my point still stands, in that God allowed (and made it happen) that his fullness be represented by an image: the phyical appearance of Jesus. That is undeniable.
        So.... If he was OK with the original image, he would be OK with a photo of the original image (in theory), would he not? If not, why?

        F.I. - Yes, Satan meant it (the crucifixion) for evil and God meant it for good. Point taken. But killing God's son would have obvious appeal for satan, whereas making an image of the crucified Christ replete with proper wounds, microscopic material evidence linking it to the Jerusalem area and a Jerusalem limestone tomb, and optical properties that defy explanation is a wholly different matter. I'm not sure how such a scheme could look good to a superintelligent evil genius in the cost/benefit analysis phase.

        Comment


        • Jesus was a man. In human form....god made. He was not a "lifeless image."

          The shroud on the other hand is a "Lifeless Image".....and that is what the commandment is refering too. Not a person. It is an image that is lifeless......God doesn't do "lifeless"........

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Anddra View Post
            Woody, you need to stop attacking the people of God right now.

            Comment


            • The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.



              He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh:


              Psalms 2:2-4a

              Comment


              • Originally posted by KaiafromBergen View Post
                scooch over, I have dip...

                Comment


                • Originally posted by House of Light View Post
                  Jesus was a man. In human form....god made. He was not a "lifeless image."

                  The shroud on the other hand is a "Lifeless Image".....and that is what the commandment is refering too. Not a person. It is an image that is lifeless......God doesn't do "lifeless"........
                  It's impossible for a human to create a living image... No need for God to command against it.
                  The fact remains that God erected an image (OK, it was alive) to represent his deity among men. Not sure why the living/dead distinction is really important here.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Woody View Post
                    Buzzardhut - All those points have been well-refuted. A bit of Googling will quickly answer them.
                    all those points?
                    even the points in scripture made by God?



                    Revelation 22:17a The Spirit and Bride are now saying, "Come!" The ones who hear are now saying, "Come!" The ones who thirst are now saying, "Come!" so come LORD Jesus !
                    Buzzardhut.net |The Watch Parables | The Rapture | Romans | The Virgin Mary | Roman Catholicism
                    Never Heard of Jesus? | The Evidence Bible | Tent Meeting | The Beast/666 | The Kingdom of Darkness | The Nephilim

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Woody View Post
                      Mmm...K....
                      It's a 'debate,' Anddra. Quit 'attacking' me! :-)
                      I'll rephrase...

                      :attarg
                      Discernment is not knowing the difference between right and wrong. It is knowing the difference between right and almost right. - Charles H. Spurgeon

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Woody View Post
                        If he was OK with the original image, he would be OK with a photo of the original image (in theory), would he not? If not, why?
                        I'm not arguing whether or not the image on the Shroud is in violation of the second commandment. I'm saying that the image on the Shroud is not consistent with the depiction and prophecies of Jesus' torture and faith that is build upon the authenticity of the Shroud is dangerous and misplaced.

                        I do not agree that "...God allowed (and made it happen) that his fullness be represented by an image: the phyical appearance of Jesus.", because the fullness of Godhead that Jesus embodied was spiritual, not physical or else we can conclude from Scripture that God is not majestic nor beautiful in appearance (Isaiah 53:2).

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Buzzardhut View Post
                          all those points?
                          even the points in scripture made by God?
                          I'll address them. I don't have time to cite sources but like i said, you can google stuff yourself:

                          2. In John 20:5-7 we find there was a separate piece wrapped around Christ's head. Yet the Shroud of Turin depicts a face on the sheet.

                          It was customary to put a cloth over the head of the crucified person while he was being crucified. Jesus was crucified with a cloth over his head, as any other Jew would have been. It would have been removed in the tomb before the body would be wrapped in the burial shroud.

                          3. The size of the shroud is 14 feet 3 inches by 3 feet 7 inches (434 centimetres by 109 centimetres). But the Bible says linen strips bound Jesus, not an enormous cloth (see John 19:40).

                          The greek word translated as 'linen strips' in some versions is 'othonion,' a word which has multiple Strongs definitions, one of which is 'a piece of linen.'

                          4. The Bible is the authoritative record of Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, and the Bible mentions nothing of a shroud.

                          See '3.'


                          9. The verses that tell of Joseph of Arimathea's wrapping Jesus in linen cloth are Matthew 27:59, Mark 15:46, Luke 23:53, and John 19:40. Look in Vine's Expository Dictionary, Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, and the Ryrie Study Bible. They all tell us the Greek words used in Matthew, Mark, and Luke (entulisso and eneileo) mean “to roll in, wind in”, “to twist, to entwine”, “to enwrap”, “to wrap by winding tightly”.

                          [I]"to enwrap" will do quite nicely.[/I]

                          (continued) ..."But if they did mean a single sheet, then Matthew, Mark, and Luke would conflict with John 19:40, which is clearer by using the Greek word othonion, meaning “linen bandage” (Strong's concordance). If the Bible writers had meant a single linen sheet like the shroud, the word used should have been othone (a single linen cloth, a sail, or a sheet). From this, it seems that all four Gospel writers were telling us that normal long strips of linen covered Jesus."

                          See '3.'

                          Comment


                          • I'm not sure if it is the burial shroud or not but I do believe that in the last days we will see signs and wonders. I don't need any proof of who Jesus is but if more archialogical evidence brings some to Christ then that would be a good thing. For instance finding the Arc of the Covenant or Noah's arc. I know we are finding more and more evidence all the time to support the truth of the Bible.

                            Comment


                            • 'I'm saying that the image on the Shroud is not consistent with the depiction and prophecies of Jesus' torture"

                              I've given a reasonable argument as to why this ain't necessarily so, so I guess well just have to drop this point.

                              "I do not agree that "...God allowed (and made it happen) that his fullness be represented by an image: the phyical appearance of Jesus.", because the fullness of Godhead that Jesus embodied was spiritual, not physical or else we can conclude from Scripture that God is not majestic nor beautiful in appearance (Isaiah 53:2)."

                              I don't mean to say that Jesus' incarnation 'looks' just like God in heaven. I mean that God allowed his deity to be represented by AN image. Regardless of its qualities. That's all. So he would not have issues with people taking a photograph of it. An image is an image is an image, 3-D or otherwise.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Woody View Post
                                I'll address them. I don't have time to cite sources but like i said, you can google stuff yourself:

                                2. In John 20:5-7 we find there was a separate piece wrapped around Christ's head. Yet the Shroud of Turin depicts a face on the sheet.

                                It was customary to put a cloth over the head of the crucified person while he was being crucified. Jesus was crucified with a cloth over his head, as any other Jew would have been. It would have been removed in the tomb before the body would be wrapped in the burial shroud.

                                3. The size of the shroud is 14 feet 3 inches by 3 feet 7 inches (434 centimetres by 109 centimetres). But the Bible says linen strips bound Jesus, not an enormous cloth (see John 19:40).

                                The greek word translated as 'linen strips' in some versions is 'othonion,' a word which has multiple Strongs definitions, one of which is 'a piece of linen.'

                                4. The Bible is the authoritative record of Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, and the Bible mentions nothing of a shroud.

                                See '3.'


                                9. The verses that tell of Joseph of Arimathea's wrapping Jesus in linen cloth are Matthew 27:59, Mark 15:46, Luke 23:53, and John 19:40. Look in Vine's Expository Dictionary, Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, and the Ryrie Study Bible. They all tell us the Greek words used in Matthew, Mark, and Luke (entulisso and eneileo) mean “to roll in, wind in”, “to twist, to entwine”, “to enwrap”, “to wrap by winding tightly”.

                                [I]"to enwrap" will do quite nicely.[/I]

                                (continued) ..."But if they did mean a single sheet, then Matthew, Mark, and Luke would conflict with John 19:40, which is clearer by using the Greek word othonion, meaning “linen bandage” (Strong's concordance). If the Bible writers had meant a single linen sheet like the shroud, the word used should have been othone (a single linen cloth, a sail, or a sheet). From this, it seems that all four Gospel writers were telling us that normal long strips of linen covered Jesus."

                                See '3.'

                                That doesn't make the shroud of turin authentic. It doesn't prove anything, other than Christ was wrapped.....with linen.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X