Evidence for God from Science

DRDS wrote:

bippy123 wrote:

DRDS wrote:Hi guys, got some FRESH new Shroud links. The first one being obviously a good one, a video presentation by Dr. Gary Habermas seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTSuqcdyfuo

And there is another three part presentation that was made I think back in the 1970s or 1980s called In search of the Shroud of Turin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWvNl9mF2bE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4WK0rC4t5A

And finally here is another Shroud presentation given by Dr. Richard Kent, love his accent by the way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4WK0rC4t5A

Anyways, see you all later, GB.

Bro, the habermas video was off the hook, especially the way he described the 3d encoded info on the dorsal side. It definitely taught me some things I never knew before about the shroud. Ill go through the other links this weekend
God bless

Great to see that you got to watch the Habermas video in time. I watched some of it and was going to watch the rest but the user who posted the video decided to take it down for some reason. But if you can remember what all did Habermas have to say about the 3d encoded information on the dorsal side of the cloth? GB.

Hey bro sorry u didn't get to view it
Habermas correctly stated (which I can't believe I overlooked) that the dorsal image shows no distortion. If the back of the body was compressed against the tomb and also wrapped in the shroud , there is no way that the image is supposed to come out so focused with such clarity of image. I knew about the lack of compression in the dorsal end but I overlooked the in refi ls clarity on the dorsal image . All clues that when added to the pristine blood clots, the 3d info encoded and fact that the image wasn't made by contact with the body and you have a lot if clues to some very unnatural event happening in that tomb . What that event is is a no brainer

Byblos wrote:

Lonewolf wrote:i did not read all fifty some pages of this thread, so forgive me if it has already been brought up

there is scripture where one reads that 'and they cast lots to divide His garments'

so what comes to mind is what shroud is in debate? It could not have been His garments.

The shroud is what Christ was buried in, not the garments he was wearing during his passion.

Correct Byblos , Christ was most likely naked on the cross and they probably wrapped his face with the sudarium to keep the crowd from seeing his beat up face . Habermas mentions that if the shroud is of Christ (and he says that on good days he's 90% sure), the not only are we most likely seeing a snapshot of the resurrection , but we are actually seeing a snap shot of the brutality and pain that our lord endured for all of us. He then goes goes on says that so many people that the passion and crucifixion so lightly that after looking at the shroud you can't just say "Ok Christ was crucified and died for us, wanna go have burger" .

The shroud shows a man that was beaten on his face and tortes with a Roman flagrum to an inch of his life and when he was on the cross he had to inch up his body to even get a breath which would have been excruciatingly painful to do that.
He loved us so much that endured all this for us. What an awesome , loving God he is and I'm so joyful and grateful to have him in my life

PaulSacramento wrote:I think the reason that the 1st and 2nd generation followers didn't mention it is because for them, relics would NOT have been that important ( they had the first hand teachings of the apostles, direct teachings AND the HS). It may also be that the person that got them wanted to keep them safe from persecution and destruction ( lets not forget that the first generations had to deal with that a LOT and subsequent generations were not that better off).
The Gospels were written to pass on the eyewitness testimonies of the Apostles, not to "catalog" events and items for future generations.

Not only that Paul but Barrie Schwortz mentioned another reason for keeping its location a secret. Taking a bloodied burial shroud out of a Jewish tomb violates a very sacred Jewish burial law in which the boos was considers sacred and what gave the person life .anyone caught with this would have instantly been put to death. It also violated another Jewish law in which it had an image on it.

The apostles had everything to lose by not keeping it a secret. If they had told anyone about it and the Romans or pharasees found out about it, we wouldn't have the shroud today to talk about. Schwortz mentioned this in his tedx video presentation in YouTube in front of an evangelical Christian audience . I think me or DRDS posted the video link a while back.

This thread has a little bit of energy to it this week
The shroud conference is in October .

Philip wrote:

I think the reason that the 1st and 2nd generation followers didn't mention it is because for them, relics would NOT have been that important ( they had the first hand teachings of the apostles, direct teachings AND the HS). It may also be that the person that got them wanted to keep them safe from persecution and destruction ( lets not forget that the first generations had to deal with that a LOT and subsequent generations were not that better off).
The Gospels were written to pass on the eyewitness testimonies of the Apostles, not to "catalog" events and items for future generations.

Paul, I think those are all plausible points. Not to mention that, at some point, the Apostles dispersed and were no longer in constant contact. So, by then, the Shroud's exact location and knowledge of its current possessors/protectors may not have been known, as they may have only been precisely known fairly soon after the Resurrection.

Correct Philip and that may have been done for the apostles safety as well. The fewer people that knew about its where a outs the better for their safety .

But we do have one big clue of its ancient origin,the mandylion or image of eddessa which has a written history starting at 400 ad and a legendary history that takes it all the way back to the time of Christ.
The clue is the ancient koine greek description of its folding pattern which called tetradiplon which means "doubled four times". No where else in recorded koine greek history is this unique folding pattern written about except with the mandylion. When STURP was allowed to study the shroud first hand physicist John Jackson did his light raking research on the shroud and found the exact same major folding patterns that described the tatradiplon . This is the major cluw that the mandylion and shroud were the same cloth. If tetradiplon was routinely mentioned in ancient times then the case for them being the same cloth would have been weak, but the fact that this folding pattern was mentioned only once in ancient recorded history makes the case fir them being the same cloth very strong .

More can be read about this in Stephen Jones blog link here
http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/20 ... turin.html

An Excellent post on Stephen Jones's blog on why the shroud's dimensions are compelling evidence that it is authentic
Stephen really does his homework

http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/20 ... hroud.html

Great read

New Shroud presentation, this one is really interesting! Here is the link, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXU_6MehuOg

DRDS wrote:New Shroud presentation, this one is really interesting! Here is the link, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXU_6MehuOg

excellent bro, nice find as usual, will check it out tomorrow afternoon
Hope all is going well for u bro
GB
Bippy

Excellent radio audio presentation DRDS. The guy really focuses on the bilirubin blood which I think is something many others tend to of look because they are so fascinated with the image . The bilirubin shows that this blood camw from a man who was tortured horribly.just another clue in who this person is

Here is a new Shroud presentation featuring Rus Brealt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bn1DvSxXbEk

Oops - Bippy won't like this article! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... xpert.html

Sic em, Bip!

Philip wrote:Oops - Bippy won't like this article! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... xpert.html

Sic em, Bip!

Isn't Daily Mail tabloid trash?

The Mail does have a lot of tabloid stuff - but it does occasionally link to some interesting articles that it did not originate. The person in question is making some strong claims about the Shroud that are likely easy to refute - which is why this forum topic is so important. Usually what what we see about the Shroud in the press are things that Bip has already redundantly debunked.

The article was also linked on foxnews: http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/10/ ... ster-prop/

Philip wrote:The Mail does have a lot of tabloid stuff - but it does occasionally link to some interesting articles that it did not originate. The person in question is making some strong claims about the Shroud that are likely easy to refute - which is why this forum topic is so important. Usually what what we see about the Shroud in the press are things that Bip has already redundantly debunked.

The Shroud is akin to the Golden Calfs...

When do we get to dance around it?

FL

The Shroud is akin to the Golden Calfs...

When do we get to dance around it?

FL

So just what is THAT supposed to mean???!!! Maybe I'm just being grouchy, but it strikes me as being a pretty juvenile comment. IF the Shroud is authentically the result of the Resurrected Christ, then it's not just some created idol or false relic (that your sarcasm would seem to indicate you believe about it). And there are many important reasons to consider it may likely be authentic. Of COURSE, people could perversely make an idol of it, just as they might anything else. But IF indeed it IS the Real McCoy, then it was preserved miraculously for a powerful evidence and witness to the reality of the risen Christ. This is a serious topic of extensive scholarly and scientific research, and Bip has done a great job of educating us on it - which you apparently don't appreciate or respect. FL, making comments like that makes you come off like the idiots on so many atheist forums - as they are constantly striving to be seen as cynically clever and funny, with relentless sarcasm over just about every topic related to Christianity - and often concerning topics that they are woefully ignorant about.

Philip wrote:So just what is THAT supposed to mean???!!!

It means that the Shroud is nothing more than a religious icon. It is a genuine religious icon but is no more a portrait of Jesus than Eastern Orthodox iconography accurately portray the various saints. Moreover, the Shroud doesn't square with Isaiah's revelation of Jesus being a physically nondescript man, not to mention that the Shroud is usually dated to the Middle Ages.

People willingly believe in all manner of foolishness: the Loch Ness & other submarine monsters, sasquatch, the Bermuda Triangle, palmistry, horoscope, flying saucers piloted by little green men. The list is endless!

Philip wrote:And there are many important reasons to consider it may likely be authentic.

Yeah, right. There is a rack full of magazines at a newstand near my place devoted to horoscope. Maybe I'm wrong about astrology as well...

Philip wrote:...making comments like that makes you come off like the idiots on so many atheist forums - as they are constantly striving to be seen as cynically clever and funny, with relentless sarcasm over just about every topic related to Christianity - and often concerning topics that they are woefully ignorant about.

If I were not a Christian, I would say that atheist forums are for dummies. Since I am a Christian, I'll say that the atheist forums I've visited are filled with filthy talk, bad spelling and poor grammar. People who don't seem to have much education congregate there.

I think there is a type of personality that needs mystery or magic...I don't understand why. Both unbelievers and those who believe in God can be prone to such unsubstantiated beliefs.

So...listen, if you want to believe that the Shroud is the real thing, go ahead. As for me, the Shroud is in the same category as Tongues, being slain in the Spirit, KJV Onlyism and so on.

FL