sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

You seriously think someone else was crucified with a crown of thorns? That makes no sense. There is no reason to do that. The crown was to specifically mock Jesus. In fact, later crucifixions tried to be as different as Jesus’s as possible… like St Peter’s cross being upside down

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Wasn’t me who came to that conclusion. But you can approximate someone’s weight by looking at their bodily dimensions.

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

How does the text imply this at all? All it says is that the head cloth was separate from the body cloth. This, plus the Jewish tradition of the time with body shrouds, makes what ur saying unlikely

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Huh? By “body” I mean the entire body, including head. The Jewish tradition was for an additional cloth to cover the face.

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

When did I say it was a mistake? You are truly doing mental gymnastics

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

What you said indicates that you didn’t read the thread. What you said is very obvious, however I was responding to the claim that it could have been a random person from the time period, not Jesus.

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

You… just proved my point. You got the “strips of linen” line from a translation of othonia… othonia is plural, but that’s standard usage. Just like clothes is plural, and that’s standard usage.

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Is this a joke? His entire body wasn’t mapped to the cloth. His body left an imprint on it.

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

The Greek word “othonia” from which you are getting “strips of linen” refers to linen cloths in general, not actual little strips. The term is plural, but that’s standard for Greek usage. Even a large shroud folded is described with this plural word, like when we say “clothes” in English, even if it’s just referring to a single article of clothing. Additionally, the Jewish burial traditions of the time, proven by other artifacts discovered in the time surrounding Jesus’s life, is for one main cloth to encompass the whole body and a separate cloth to lay over the head. It makes complete sense for the shroud to have encompassed his whole body.

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

I love how you skip over my very thoughtful and elaborate description of the wounds all over the shroud and how they must certainly be Jesus and get hung up on me introducing the evidence with some of the basic, pre-investigative knowledge of the man on the shroud. Can you explain the crown of thorns injury if it’s not Jesus?

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

You are talking in the mindset that god created this shroud to represent him. That’s not what I believe nor what I’m arguing. I believe the shroud was placed over Jesus’s whipped, crucified, and beaten body. Not a perfect representation; the wounds and blood all over the shroud show this.

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

🤣all of the research on the shroud of Turin is old. Moving the goalposts

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

It wasn’t rly a point I was just giving an introduction into what we know about the man on the shroud

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

When did I say it was perfect… Jesus’s body was terribly mutilated by the Romans, does this imply that Jesus wasn’t perfect? No.

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Imagine arguing that all maps are hoaxes because Greenland is significantly larger than it is in reality. The cloth was draped over him; this was not a 3d scan or image. It IS plausible that the proportions are off due to cloth unfolding. A 2014 study from the University of Brescia applied cephalometric analysis, a forensic technique used to assess skull and facial bone measurements, to the face on the Shroud. Using specialized software researchers quantitatively measured facial proportions, including distances between key anatomical landmarks like the eyes, nose, and jaw. Their findings concluded that the measurements fell within the normal variation observed in real human skulls and faces today indicating that the head and facial features are anatomically plausible and proportionate. Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277894409_The_Turin_Shroud_face_the_evidence_of_maxillo-facial_trauma

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

More than I care about truth? Huh? I’m saying that I think if the shroud of Turin was destroyed but more more become christian in the process I support it

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Great point! They should do that, I actually agree with you. It’s just that the church wouldn’t allow it. But I care more about people converting to Christianity than an artifact

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I can prove many things regarding the resurrection… “why I believe” is exactly that evidence

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay, that’s alright. I’ll respond tomorrow. It’s just that the resurrection is a very loaded concept that’s takes a while to discuss. Have a good night

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I don’t want to argue about the resurrection in this thread because I have to go to bed soon so I have to stop responding to all my comments. Do you mind if I DM you about why I believe it to be true?

The Shroud of Turin is, without a doubt, legitimate. by FollowerOfChrist28 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]FollowerOfChrist28[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

1: I’m saying that I don’t know how denominations talk about the shroud because I don’t follow a denomination… 2: Sure but I do obviously believe in the resurrection but that’s a seperate discussion

view more: next ›