medical students boycotting lectures on evolution

[SavedByChrist94]

Not even in the most twisted definitions of free will I have come across, would God performing render it "dead". The ability to make a choice is not influence by viewing a miracle. It is made easier, but having an easier choice does not mean there is no free will.

The minute Jesus Christ(God) comes back, is the minute that those who rejected Him will get on their knees pretending they loved Him, guaranteeed. if God appeared before us again, under today's conditions we all be asking Him for help nonstop, the world as we know it would be rendered extremely different and there would be no free will.

People would pretend to love Him, ask Him nonstop for things, that is not why He made the world so He won't break free will.

There is no evidence whatsoever that he did.

Now it's either you're a liar(which makes you a morally bad person because you can potientially decieve others) or you're extremely naive in The Scientific Area,

The Bible(40 Different witnesses, Approx. 60 Accounts, no Contradiction, No error, Scientific Foreknowledge, Historical Foreknowledge, Scientific Accuracy, Historical Accuracy, which means whether you like it or not, these witnesses and their accounts are valid for testing in Court of Law, and as proven All Accounts are Accurate and True.)

Jesus Christ Resurrection is The Only Explanation of the Facts, All other theories have been disproven and rendered Impossible, leaving only One possiblity(Resurrection) which means He really Resurrected from the dead.


The Shroud, no evidence of forgery, not a painting, has blood, x-ray like image, cannot be reproduced with any technology past or present therefore not man made/forged and is supernatural, caused by a burst of UV light from the body, crucified person who resembles Historical Jesus Christ to a tee.

Already with this Jesus Christ is The Lord/God and God(The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit)

First Uncaused Cause(Scientific and Philosophical Fact, in otherwords overall Fact and if you deny this you must deny "macro-evolution" as this actually is a Proven Fact.)

An Infinite Past of Anything in Succession(Matter, Time, Space, Energy, Change, cause & effect etc) is a Impossibility. if the past was infinite we would never get to the present, count down from Infinity to zero. therefore anything in succession must have a beginning in the finite past. which means it is an indeniable Fact that once nothing existed.(evident by this and the big bang)


Since infinite amount of past cause and effect is impossible it had to start, which means there is a cause which has no cause, The First Uncaused Cause.

The Cause is,

- Uncaused since has no cause

- Beginningless since if began to exist must have a cause.

-Changeless since an Infinite Amount of past change is impossible and a change requires a cause, First Uncaused Cause has no cause

- Timeless since changeless, no change, and no Time.

- Eternal since has always existed, is changeless(ceasing to exist would be a change) and is Timeless.

- Spaceless since Timeless and changeless, things in space are ever changing and are in time.

- Immaterial since Timeless and Changless, matter is ever changing, changeless material doesn't exist, and changeless material cannot cause anything, therefore Immaterial.

-All Powerful since created everything and lesser doesn't produce the greater.

- Of Which No Greater Can Be Conceived since Created Everything.

Now that was part 1,

Part 2,

3 Indeinable Facts

1, Whatever Begins to exists has a cause

2, The Universe began to exist(infinite regression is impossible, big bang, and Borde, Guide, Valienkin Theorem make this an irrefutable Fact.)

3, Therefore The Universe has a Cause to it's existence.

The Cause of The Universe is,

-Spaceless and Timeless, since Created/Started/Caused Space and Time, can therefore exist without Space and Time.

- Since Spaceless and Timeless is Changeless

-Since Changeless is Immaterial, and since doesn't change, The Cause didn't start to exist, making it The First Uncaused Cause.

The First Uncaused Cause is The Cause of The Universe.

Now time to prove that this is without a shadow of a doubt God(which means whether "macro-evolution" happened or not, God exists and you have to accept that)

1. That fits God's description to a tee.

2. The First Uncaused Cause is The Direct Cause of The Universe, God(The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit) is a First Uncaused Cause who Directly Caused The Universe.

3, Is Immaterial therefore can either be a Mind or Abstract Object such as numbers(The Mind is immaterial and we'll get to that later), Abstract objects cause nothing, therefore a Mind.

4, Fine Tuning, The Universe is so fine tuned for life that there's only 3 possibilities as to why,

Law, Chance, or Design. Cannot be law or chance, since Law can be different and Chance is Extremely Improbable that it's Factual it didn't happen that way, therefore Obviously Designed.

5, Only 2 types of causes. Accidential/Mindless or Intentional/Mind, Accidents require a prior cause, therefore cannot be accidential therefore caused on Purpose, God exists.

6, All "naturalistic" theories are Impossible.

1, "naturalism" is disproven by The Universe being caused so by default Supernatural and Immaterial exists.

2, Nothing existed and nothing causes nothing, the "nothing causes something" Quantum Mechanics argument proposed by w-child has been thrown in the fire with these facts,

1, The Quantum Vaccum isn't empty space.

2, Nothing cannot cause something with this fact,

The Cause of an effect must be equivelent or greater than it's effect,

Nothing has no properties, something has properties. so for nothing to cause something it would need the properties to do so, so if nothing caused something, it needs to properties of something rendering it to be something instead of nothing! and if nothing caused something it would need the properties from something eternal rendering it again not nothing.

Nothing can only cause, nothing.

and the "universe caused itself" argument(whoever posed this argument needs their liscense revoked, is automatically void as if the universe caused itself it would have already needed to exist!.

And lastly as proven in #5 can only have been caused on purpose.

There is no naturalistic explanation as 1, Supernatural exist, 2, it's impossible for nothing to cause something and 3, it is an impossiblity for The First Uncaused Cause to cause on accident.

#7, Creation ex nihilo proves The Bible is even more Scientifically Accurate and Correct, Creation ex Nihilo proves God exists and God is The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit who is 1 God that is 3 Persons.

Dualism


1. If the mind was the brain or any material then everything we do, all thoughts, actions, plans, will, cognitive functions etc would be accidential, rendering free will nonexistent. Free Will exists therefore the mind cannot be material.

you therefore have 3 choices,

1, No Director(mind), rendering nerve signals random, which is false since we do have a mind and do direct our nerve signals, that is a fact.

2, Material Director which is false since it would be the same as no director because there would be no direction to energy signals.

3, Immaterial Director where nerve signals can be directed.

2. material is mindless, when you laugh, do your cheeks or hands, or face know what your laughing about? no, they're just a piece of meat, it knows nothing, such as your eyeballs, fingers etc.

3. Immaterial Properties exist, Love, Emotions, Abstract Objects(Numbers), Data, Feelings, Beliefs, Delusions, Fantasies, all exist, yet aren't material.

For example, what is material about the data you're reading off this sentence? Physically it's energy signals hitting your screen, now unless you say the data isn't real, then it's Immaterial.

4, Thoughts are not material, and if they are material whatever causes them cannot be material.

Think of a pink giant elephant, now if your head was cut open would we find that elephant? no. can anyone hear what you're thinking? nope, it's not material.

When you talk to someone, are you talking to a person or just flesh? if you say the latter than you might as well say you can talk to the wall and be perfectly fine.

5. Color is not material.

6, Here's an experiment, Hit your hand on the desk, feel the pain? now it is a fact that you are not your hand, if we cut off your hand and the nerves in it you would be incapable of feeling it. this means the reason you feel your hand is because of a connection to you(can be brain or Immaterial Spirit, I'm allowing both for experiment)

Now lets assume your mind is your brain as most "atheist" assume, and the brain is the connection to the hand, now if your brain is what is allowing you to feel your hand, then that is impossible, if you're your brain, when your hand gets hit, you'd feel the pain in your head, not your hand. now you cannot say the brain sending energy signals to the hand is causing the pain since you aren't your hand! we can cut it off and you won't be able to feel it anymore.

The Only Possibility is that your hand is connected to your brain and you are an Immaterial Substance that can feel the hand, otherwise there is no possiblity of feeling your hand.

7, Third, I believe it is important to note that some of the world’s foremost neuroscientists have believed that the mind is immaterial. These neuroscientists have been well aware that stimulating the brain can produce some intriguing psychological results. One of the pioneers in the field of neuroscience was Wilder Penfield. In his fascinating book The Mystery of the Mind, he writes the following:


When I have caused a conscious patient to move his hand by applying an electrode to the motor cortex of one hemisphere, I have often asked him about it. Invariably his response was: ‘I didn’t do that. You did.’ When I caused him to vocalize, he said: ‘I didn’t make that sound. You pulled it out of me.’ When I caused the record of the stream of consciousness to run again and so presented to him the record of his past experience, he marveled that he should be conscious of the past as well as of the present. He was astonished that it should come back to him so completely, with more detail than he could possibly recall voluntarily. He assumed at once that, somehow, the surgeon was responsible for the phenomenon, but he recognized the details as those of his own past experience. (76)


Penfield goes on to note that “There is no place in the cerebral cortex where electrical stimulation will cause a patient . . . to decide” (77). This is consistent with my point that choices are undetermined events with a teleological explanation. In light of his work as a neuroscientist, Penfield concludes the following: “For my own part, after years of striving to explain the mind on the basis of brain-action alone, I have come to the conclusion that it is simpler (and far easier and logical) if one adopts the hypothesis that our being does consist of two fundamental elements” (80).



Read more: God and Mind/Body Dualism | Reasonable Faith

8, Last but not least, Scientific Fact that every cell in our bodies die and regenerate with new cells, that by every 7 years we are completely new material beings. now I know I'm the same person I was in 1998, I'm the same guy who's been through 2 1/2 new material bodies already yet I'm the same mind, therefore it is a Scientific Fact that human beings are Immaterial beings/Spirits controlling material bodies.

"materialism", "atheism", "agnostics", etc are all dead already without even going into "macro-evolution.

Morality.

Morals are Immaterial Properties, under "naturalism" Immaterial wouldn't exist.

Under "naturalism", things such as rape would have no reason for being wrong and could actually be justified.

rape is Objectively Wrong, there is a reason for that. under "naturalism" there is no reason and it would be justified under "naturalism", therefore "naturalism" is fairy tales, Therefore God must Necessarily exist.

"macro-evolution"

"macro-evolution" cannot explain morals.

"macro-evolution" is impossible.

People base an assumption that multiple bouts of Micro-Evolution produces "macro", Micro means within a species. dogs evolving will only ever be, dogs.

Irreducible Complexity,

Heart, lungs, Kidney, Liver, Brain, Veins, Blood, etc take one out and everything fails, must have been given at once.

and

Darwinism Refuted.com

Apparent Design, Symmetry, and Immaterial Properties such as Data(DNA), Immune System, Apparent Design that even "atheist"/"evolutionist" don't deny!(They even say, it "just appears designed", Nothing appears Intelligently Designed Unless, Intelligently Designed, throw that logic in the fire.)

Billions of transitional fossils needed, even if fossils are hard to find as most "atheist" say, I'll allow that excuse, however under that excuse Millions are needed, still aren't a million, "macro-evolution" is false.

"macro-evolution" is incapable with "naturalism", God must exist for "macro-evolution" to happen, therefore "macro-evolution" along with the other evidence didn't happen. therefore advocates for "macro-evolution" cannot be "atheist" and if they are an "atheist"/"naturalist" then they cannot be an advocate of "macro-evolution"

With that said God Factually Exists, and God is The Trinity of The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit. Time to prepare for Eternity.


Now what proof and evidence is there for "atheism" to be accurate and correct?

P.S., Yes Jesus Christ,(Who is in the picture in my signature), Created Us and everything you see.

 

[46AND2]

Nope, demons, turned into demons by free will. see your slander and kindergarten logic, one day you'll learn(unless you already know and are just trolling us)



(snip)...

That's what I said originally, but was told by somebrother that free will didn't apply to the demons. Perhaps you should maybe pay closer attention to the conversation.

And what you just said goes back to my first question which was essentially, if God revealing himself kills free will, then how can demons (who clearly know God is real) rebel?

 

[Elendur]

And you provide no proof and only opinion in your response, please don't irritates me with that nonsense then claim you refuted something.

1. I don't provide proof outside of mathematics. I provide evidence.
2. I claim I refuted something? Where?
3. You yourself cited the entire text of the first link (excluded the signature and email address). There was no references to any evidence whatsoever. No evidence. No facts.

You're welcome to cite where they have cited their sources, don't make the mistake to cite links to other blogs or articles though (since you'd have to dig through them to find their sources).

2, I refuted what see said in Post #577

You didn't refute what Cute Tink wrote. In order to do so would to cite where any of those two links refer to a study of the shroud.

Opinion again, back up what you say, "atheistic" logic of hypocrisy irritates me, I provide proof, and you say it's not so therefore it ain't proof? please, provide proof not an opinion.

No. You didn't provide any proof, therefore it wasn't any proof.
Please explain, preferably an explicit one, how I am being hypocritical.
Oh, and I'll tell you again:
I'm no atheist, keep that in mind, would you? I don't call you a buddhist, muslim etc.

Do you want proof, study math. Otherwise, ask for evidence.

{Video}

They compared the shroud to some human characteristics, how does that constitute evidence that it's the death shroud of christ?
PS. They didn't cite any studies as well.


Edit: Rereading this post I have to change what I've misspoken (written). I'm an atheist, I'd prefer to be addressed as agnostic though.

 

[46AND2]

In the beginning of the world people didn't understand God or lacked knowledge, it was extremely normal, unlike now where we desperately need God. example is, The Pharisees, they saw the miracles, yet felt God is a threat and thought they had a ticket to Heaven, whereas now we'd do anything to go to Heaven and not Hell that even the most cold blooded rebellious person would subject to God and wouldn't even think about sinning.

Or Adam and Eve, they saw God firsthand and were new to the world, it was normal to see Him and have Free Will, they never lived like we did.

Sorry this does not explain, whatsoever how miracles kill free will. We would still have the choice of accepting or rejecting God. Just like demons, just like Adam and Eve, just like doubting Thomas, just like Peter, just like the fed 5000, etc. etc. etc.

Because it's normal for them, that is analogous to one asking, "How do you know that once you get to Heaven you won't sin and mess it up?"

No, that is not analogous to my question at all.

I answer, because it's like a homeless person who messed up in life, gets given a billion dollars, you really think they want to go back to the street when they know what it's like? Heaven is going to be so awesome that #1, There's no way I'd want life to be like earth and #2, we know how it was before Heaven so why mess it up. no reason to sin in Heaven. difference between demons and humans is humans experienced sin all their lives, demons started sinning and before that never experienced it(satan for example)

You say demons have free will.
Demons know God is real
Demons chose to rebel against God

Therefore, God revealing himself through miracles cannot kill free will.

It's really very simple.

 

[Jamin4422]

The minute Jesus Christ(God) comes back, is the minute that those who rejected Him will get on their knees pretending they loved Him, guaranteeed.

Yep as soon as we get caught we are so sorry, please forgive us, I will never do it again. And then the first chance we get we are out there doing it again. Only problem is He is onto us. Sometimes God knows us better then we know ourselves. You can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time. But you can not fool God.

People base an assumption that multiple bouts of Micro-Evolution produces "macro", Micro means within a species. dogs evolving will only ever be, dogs.

Isn't that enough? There is a huge amount of variation between dogs.

 

[SavedByChrist94]

That's what I said originally, but was told by somebrother that free will didn't apply to the demons. Perhaps you should maybe pay closer attention to the conversation.

And what you just said goes back to my first question which was essentially, if God revealing himself kills free will, then how can demons (who clearly know God is real) rebel?

demons were Angels, they weren't like us, we were born to this misery, Angels were made into greatest, and Then messed up, just like Adam. we're different, why? because we know what sin/misery feels like, so much so that even the most cold blooded rebellious person would do all they can to be accepted by God(The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit) for even their own benefit out of fear of Hell or to get what they want, they would become teachers pet, rendering Free Will(at least to a majority) dead, meaning what the world was made for(Finite beings with free will) would be over.

That's why in Heaven we will probably have Free Will however do you think we'll sin? no, we know how it was in the earth, we wouldn't want to go back, while The Angels who turned to demons had no clue and messed themselves sending themselves to Hell(No going back for them, as The Bible shows those who go to Hell will hate God)

There's your answer.

Sorry this does not explain, whatsoever how miracles kill free will. We would still have the choice of accepting or rejecting God.

No you wouldn't, alot of tough guys say this crap, we all know that if God appears to us we'd be teachers pet.

Just like demons, just like Adam and Eve, just like doubting Thomas, just like Peter, just like the fed 5000, etc. etc. etc.

Doubting Thomas didn't believe Until The Resurrection, they could've thought Jesus Christ was anyone(remember the slander the pharisees said?), The Resurrection was The Confirmation of His Deity.

demons and Adam and Eve, explained above.

Peter denied that he was Jesus Christ Disciple, not His Deity and it was according to Jesus Christ will.

The 5000 Fed(which is actually irrefutable no one could have made this up, Bible speaks for itself as True) who knows if their free will was broken or not? I'd say probably yes as Jesus Christ(God) was getting fame, people were following Him, etc.

No, that is not analogous to my question at all.

Actually it is as it pertains to Free Will and Knowing God exists.

You say demons have free will.
Demons know God is real
Demons chose to rebel against God

Therefore, God revealing himself through miracles cannot kill free will.

It's really very simple.

I refuted everything you said, also Adam and Eve knew God is real, they're the first to witness Him, yet they still sinned why? they were new, they were born to greatness, we? born into a sad world.

1. I don't provide proof outside of mathematics. I provide evidence.

you didn't provide anything except your opinion, and no one wants to hear it.

2. I claim I refuted something? Where?
3. You yourself cited the entire text of the first link (excluded the signature and email address). There was no references to any evidence whatsoever. No evidence. No facts.

You're welcome to cite where they have cited their sources, don't make the mistake to cite links to other blogs or articles though (since you'd have to dig through them to find their sources).


You didn't refute what Cute Tink wrote. In order to do so would to cite where any of those two links refer to a study of the shroud.

The first link gives a link to this link,

Scientists say Shroud of Turin authentic, of supernatural origin Which is Valid.

The 2nd link is from The president of The Resurrection of the Shroud Foundation, notice your biased in assuming that since he is the president of the foundation that he would be biased, please throw that presupposition out the window.

Now for further and better links see below,

No. You didn't provide any proof, therefore it wasn't any proof.

Please don't lie because I'll post again,

Habermas - The Plight of the New Atheism: A Critique

Habermas - The Plight of the New Atheism: A Critique

The Shroud of Turin Wasn’t Faked, Italian Experts Say - ABC News

The Shroud of Turin Website - Main Menu

Is the Shroud of Turin a Painting?

http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/thibault-lg.pdf

Shroud of Turin Blog

That is enough Scientific Facts.

Please explain, preferably an explicit one, how I am being hypocritical.
Oh, and I'll tell you again:
I'm no atheist, keep that in mind, would you? I don't call you a buddhist, muslim etc.

Oh yes you are, if you were an "agnostic" you wouldn't have presupposition, you're already leaning towards "atheism" with the biased so we have no reason to assume your an "agnostic", if you are then act like it and keep the presupposition down.

Do you want proof, study math. Otherwise, ask for evidence.

They compared the shroud to some human characteristics, how does that constitute evidence that it's the death shroud of christ?
PS. They didn't cite any studies as well.

Now you're either a liar or just didn't watch the video without presupposition/attentiveness, Gary didn't compare it to human characteristics . The Video is sort of a study, Gary shows teeth on the image that can only be reproduced by x ray like technology rendering it not to be a forgery dismissing your argument, so watch again,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU1P1du8NCc

 

[Skarl]

Why can't we ever talk about real science in here? Like cell biology or neuroscience or chemistry? Why does it always have to be constant arguing with people espousing these whack, off-the-deep-end fringe conspiracy theories and pseudoscience that has been bunk for decades?

 

[RickG]

The Video is sort of a study, Gary shows teeth on the image that can only be reproduced by x ray like technology rendering it not to be a forgery dismissing your argument, so watch again,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU1P1du8NCc

Never mind the Shroud dates a good 1300 years after the death of Christ. And how does one attribute it to Christ anyway. Oh, it looks like a depiction of what middle age Europeans thought Jesus may have looked like. And never mind that its first appearance in the church is the same as the Shroud dates.

 

[46AND2]

@saved by christ 94

You haven't refuted anything I have said. You said that angels became demons because they had free will. Yet they knew God was real. Therefore God's revealing of himself is not the cause of free will death. Otherwise, the angels could not have chosen to become demons through free will.

If you want to argue that humans don't have the strength to reject God despite knowing that God exists, that is a different argument. One with some contrary evidence, I might add. Judas witnessed miracles, and still chose to betray Jesus. And the Bible even says that people will still reject him even if they do see miracles.

Luke 16:31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”

All you are arguing for is the nature of how God made man which kills free will. Not the miracles.

 

[Cute Tink]

The first link gives a link to this link,

Scientists say Shroud of Turin authentic, of supernatural origin Which is Valid.

The article you linked to has little information, but the MSNBC article it links to has a bunch of information:

Nickell said Di Lazzaro and his colleagues started out with the assumption that the coloration on the Shroud couldn't have been created by applying pigment to the linen — which runs counter to the conclusions drawn by other studies. Starting out with the idea that the human figure shown on the Shroud is an "impossible image" stacks the deck in favor of a miraculous explanation, he said.
"Making the assumption of a miracle is a really, really, really, really, really big assumption," Nickell said. "That it's done in the name of science is just astonishing."Nickell said the latest findings don't prove much of anything, even though they're dressed up in high-tech tests.
"It is made up of whole cloth," he said. "The pro-Shroud people start with the answer, and then they have to get some scientific evidence to back this up."

Bolding mine.


Which is pretty much what I said before. Thank you for the additional link. Perhaps you would enjoy reading the entirety of the article.

 

[Jamin4422]

The Shroud, no evidence of forgery,

Would not matter. It would almost be even more amazing if it were a forgery and somehow a man was able to make the Shroud. Even though there is NO ONE alive today that can duplicate the Shroud. Bottom line is we are all equal, we all get the exact same evidence and we all get to decide for ourselves based on the evidence. Or based in what God has done for us and the work that He continues to do in our life. IF we expect to go up in the rapture then we can expect that the resurrection power of God is going to be at work in our lives to prepare us for the rapture. IF you do not have ANY of the resurrection power of God working in you, then that will make it more difficult to accept the shroud because the shroud is evidence of Jesus being raised up from the dead. The shroud points toward the resurrection.

 

[Loudmouth]

Would not matter. It would almost be even more amazing if it were a forgery and somehow a man was able to make the Shroud. Even though there is NO ONE alive today that can duplicate the Shroud.

Where has anyone shown that no one alive today can duplicate the Shroud? They can certainly duplicate the carbon dating, and it puts the shroud well after the claimed events in the Bible, and in the same era as when the Shroud first appeared.

Also, that is not an image that a body would leave. It would be distorted as the face print is stretched from 3d to 2d.

IF you do not have ANY of the resurrection power of God working in you, then that will make it more difficult to accept the shroud because the shroud is evidence of Jesus being raised up from the dead. The shroud points toward the resurrection.

What did PT Barnum say . . .

 

[Skarl]

Why would anyone want to duplicate the Shroud? Only even halfway plausible reason I can think of would be to sell it to rich, gullible fools who believe in it to make a lot of money.

 

[Ken-1122]

The Shroud, no evidence of forgery, not a painting, has blood, x-ray like image, cannot be reproduced with any technology past or present therefore not man made/forged and is supernatural, caused by a burst of UV light from the body, crucified person who resembles Historical Jesus Christ to a tee.

Since you are still bringing up the Shroud of Turin, care to comment on this video?
Turin Shroud is a fake, very short proof - YouTube

Ken

 

[Jamin4422]

Where has anyone shown that no one alive today can duplicate the Shroud?

Really, your going to try to get into this conversation without doing any research and without knowing anything at all about the Shroud. I guess that is typical around here. Still I will answer you, the proof is in the pudding. NO ONE has been able to duplicate the Shroud. Why don't you give it a try. Remember this Shroud has been examined by people that are forensic science experts. Just to begin with if you wanted to made a Shroud of Turin you would have to be an expert: Historians, Pathologist, Linguists, Biblical Scholars, Textile Experts, Chemists, Physicists, Photographic Expert, Artist, Botanist, Microbiologist and well as many other areas of study. Where highly trained people have examined the shroud for all the evidence that it contains. The Shroud is a wonderful item to study. You will learn a lot from a study of the Shroud. There is also another piece in another collection that matches the Shroud. I do not know why they do not talk about that as much, but it clear is an additional confirmation. Like I said, I do not care if it is man made or not. That would not distract from it at all. That would be even a greater miracle that man is able to do something so amazing. To give a witness and a testimony for the resurrection of Jesus.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Really, your going to try to get into this conversation without doing any research and without knowing anything at all about the Shroud. I guess that is typical around here. Still I will answer you, the proof is in the pudding. NO ONE has been able to duplicate the Shroud. Why don't you give it a try.

So -- because nobody has done it means nobody can.

Remember this Shroud has been examined by people that are forensic science experts. Just to begin with if you wanted to made a Shroud of Turin you would have to be an expert: Historians, Pathologist, Linguists, Biblical Scholars, Textile Experts, Chemists, Physicists, Photographic Expert, Artist, Botanist, Microbiologist and well as many other areas of study.

Or... have access to the notes and expertise of such people... which we do.

Where highly trained people have examined the shroud for all the evidence that it contains. The Shroud is a wonderful item to study. You will learn a lot from a study of the Shroud.

Such as?

There is also another piece in another collection that matches the Shroud. I do not know why they do not talk about that as much, but it clear is an additional confirmation. Like I said, I do not care if it is man made or not. That would not distract from it at all. That would be even a greater miracle that man is able to do something so amazing. To give a witness and a testimony for the resurrection of Jesus.

So a convincing fake would be as good for you as an actual miracle?

 

[Jamin4422]

Why would anyone want to duplicate the Shroud? Only even halfway plausible reason I can think of would be to sell it to rich, gullible fools who believe in it to make a lot of money.

Francis Schaeffer talks about a water shed issue. Where the water at a water shed will go off one direction or another. Christians when they examine the Shroud will be strengthened in their faith. Skeptics and scoffers will walk away even more deceived and that much more in error. Like I said the Shroud is Physical Evidence for the Resurrection. If you are not going to be resurrected. If your going to perish in your sin. Then you do not need to know anything about it.

 

[Jamin4422]

So -- because nobody has done it means nobody can.

Nobody CAN because no one has a plan. Show me your plan Stan and then we will talk about if you can or not. My experence is that a lot of the people around here are talkers, and not much when it comes to getting the job done.

 

[Jamin4422]

So -- because nobody has done it means nobody can.

Nobody CAN because no one has a plan. Show me your plan Stan and then we will talk about if you can or not. My experience is that a lot of the people around here are talkers, and not much when it comes to getting the job done.

 

[Ken-1122]

Nobody CAN because no one has a plan. Show me your plan Stan and then we will talk about if you can or not. My experience is that a lot of the people around here are talkers, and not much when it comes to getting the job done.

Do you really believe the shroud of turin is for real? Care to comment on this video?
Turin Shroud is a fake, very short proof - YouTube

Ken