Why would anyone worship Jesus?

[Terrio]

@[Danger Close] I don't really see how the shroud of Turin is sure proof Jesus was alive and resurrected from the dead

In what proof does it have nothing to do with it?

It's over 2,000 years old. It has a mans face on it, which is compared to what Jesus may have looked like.

It says right on the wiki link you gave it was radiocarbon dated to be made around 1260-1390. And I don't really understand how a drawing of a guys face proves he was resurrected from the dead or even has anything to do with Jesus

They also all get a boner and Say jesus is real when They say they see his face in a potato chip

There is no reasoning with them
They believe -Faith- Non fact
We don't believe

 

[Danger Close]

In what proof does it have nothing to do with it?

It's over 2,000 years old. It has a mans face on it, which is compared to what Jesus may have looked like.

It says right on the wiki link you gave it was radiocarbon dated to be made around 1260-1390. And I don't really understand how a drawing of a guys face proves he was resurrected from the dead or even has anything to do with Jesus

They also all get a boner and Say jesus is real when They say they see his face in a potato chip

There is no reasoning with them
They believe -Faith- Non fact
We don't believe

Excuse me?

I probably know much more about astrology, biology, and chemistry then your feeble mind could even handle, and you're saying I have no belief in "fact", only "faith".

That's where your true ignorance kicks in.

 

[Relapse]

Wow, I really thought you could do some research.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin_Research_Project
"We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin. The image is an ongoing mystery and until further chemical studies are made, perhaps by this group of scientists, or perhaps by some scientists in the future, the problem remains unsolved."

Crucifixion was a popular method of execution from around 600 BC-400 AD(assuming its even that old with absolutely no evidence), and the fact a mans face is imprinted on a cloth somehow proves Jesus, resurrected from the dead. I fail to see the reasoning there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioc..._Turin#Chemical_properties_of_the_sample_site
The shroud was also damaged by a fire in the Late Middle Ages which could have added carbon material to the cloth, resulting in a higher radiocarbon content and a later calculated age.

There is plenty of theories out there as to why the dating might be off in the carbon dating, but none of those theories have made any progress nor have any factual basis as to why the date would be off. The fact is all the evidence points too the shroud being made around 1262-1384 AD.

I really don't like to get involved in religious debates but I'm getting dragged in.

---

In what proof does it have nothing to do with it?

It's over 2,000 years old. It has a mans face on it, which is compared to what Jesus may have looked like.

It says right on the wiki link you gave it was radiocarbon dated to be made around 1260-1390. And I don't really understand how a drawing of a guys face proves he was resurrected from the dead or even has anything to do with Jesus

They also all get a boner and Say jesus is real when They say they see his face in a potato chip

There is no reasoning with them
They believe -Faith- Non fact
We don't believe

I'm really not trying to offend people like that I'm simply asking a question

 

[Danger Close]

Crucifixion was a popular method of execution from around 600 BC-400 AD(assuming its even that old with absolutely no evidence), and the fact a mans face is imprinted on a cloth somehow proves Jesus, resurrected from the dead. I fail to see the reasoning there.

The shroud was taken and used as a form of evidence throughout the years. Basically if you did some research, instead of me having to spoon-feed you the information that could've taken you half the time to reply to this, you would get somewhere.

There is plenty of theories out there as to why the dating might be off in the carbon dating, but none of those theories have made any progress nor have any factual basis as to why the date would be off. The fact is all the evidence points too the shroud being made around 1262-1384 AD.

I really don't like to get involved in religious debates but I'm getting dragged in.

The "fact" you conclude in your sentence is also a theory. By you saying this makes you have more of a comfort to believe that there really is no God. But, as you have said in your above statement crucifixion was popular before the dates of 1262-1384 AD. Someone with such an "open" mind, you really failed to see what damage has been done to the shroud, and it leaves you narrowly minded.

 

[Relapse]

The shroud was taken and used as a form of evidence throughout the years. Basically if you did some research, instead of me having to spoon-feed you the information that could've taken you half the time to reply to this, you would get somewhere.

If you could actually respond to one of my posts with an actual point instead of "do some research" that would be great.

The "fact" you conclude in your sentence is also a theory. By you saying this makes you have more of a comfort to believe that there really is no God. But, as you have said in your above statement crucifixion was popular before the dates of 1262-1384 AD. Someone with such an "open" mind, you really failed to see what damage has been done to the shroud, and it leaves you narrowly minded.

The carbon dating isn't a theory? It was an actual test done by multiple highly respected sources, which isn't comparable to a far fetched last ditch effort by people to falsify the testing of the carbon dating. And until ACTUAL proof comes up that the carbon dating is wrong and it is ACTUALLY found to be dated around the time Jesus Christ was supposedly alive, than there really is nothing to debate about. PM me than.

And I don't remember me ever saying I have an ""Open" Mind" so I don't understand where that came from. all I said is I don't like getting involved in religious arguments, there completely pointless, it's impossible for either side to win and it's just going to end in flaming and hatred. Which is why I'm not going to bother posting in this thread again.

 

[Danger Close]

The carbon dating isn't a theory? It was an actual test done by multiple highly respected sources, which isn't comparable to a far fetched last ditch effort by people to falsify the testing of the carbon dating.

On the shroud there are burns.

http://www.shroudofturin4journalists.com/Details/poker.htm

Those burns is what probably lead to it being from the medieval times.

And until ACTUAL proof comes up that the carbon dating is wrong and it is ACTUALLY found to be dated around the time Jesus Christ was supposedly alive, than there really is nothing to debate about. PM me than.

Carbon dating isn't wrong, but rather more of a mix-up, and you're IGNORING everything I've given you.

Which is why I'm not going to bother posting in this thread again.

K.

 

[Pretend]

I honestly don't know what to believe anymore.

 

[Aidan]

Damn, didn't know a small thought i had would spark such a big debate.

Oh and I'm satanic. I believe in sin as a sign of human nature and Lucifer was using his free will to try and take the power from god whom cast him to hell.

So pretty much, God believed in keeping all the angels/human race as a kind of sheep to worship him.

But that's just me..

 

[Danger Close]

Damn, didn't know a small thought i had would spark such a big debate.

Oh and I'm satanic. I believe in sin as a sign of human nature and Lucifer was using his free will to try and take the power from god whom cast him to hell.

So pretty much, God believed in keeping all the angels/human race as a kind of sheep to worship him.

But that's just me..

Oh, so what type of Satanist are you?

LaVayan?

 

[Aidan]

Damn, didn't know a small thought i had would spark such a big debate.

Oh and I'm satanic. I believe in sin as a sign of human nature and Lucifer was using his free will to try and take the power from god whom cast him to hell.

So pretty much, God believed in keeping all the angels/human race as a kind of sheep to worship him.

But that's just me..

Oh, so what type of Satanist are you?

LaVayan?

Yerp. Read his book a few times. Don't consider it a 'Bible' though.

 

[Danger Close]

Damn, didn't know a small thought i had would spark such a big debate.

Oh and I'm satanic. I believe in sin as a sign of human nature and Lucifer was using his free will to try and take the power from god whom cast him to hell.

So pretty much, God believed in keeping all the angels/human race as a kind of sheep to worship him.

But that's just me..

Oh, so what type of Satanist are you?

LaVayan?

Yerp. Read his book a few times. Don't consider it a 'Bible' though.

You realize, the LaVeyan Satanism is more of a Atheist sense?

 

[Aidan]

Oh, so what type of Satanist are you?

LaVayan?

Yerp. Read his book a few times. Don't consider it a 'Bible' though.

You realize, the LaVeyan Satanism is more of a Atheist sense?

Yep. Many people I've talked to about it consider it the 'Satanic bible' though.

If I had faith to be a christian it'd be great, but I don't. I went to a christian church for the first 16 years of my life, read the whole old testament.

 

[Danger Close]

Yerp. Read his book a few times. Don't consider it a 'Bible' though.

You realize, the LaVeyan Satanism is more of a Atheist sense?

Yep. Many people I've talked to about it consider it the 'Satanic bible' though.

If I had faith to be a christian it'd be great, but I don't. I went to a christian church for the first 16 years of my life, read the whole old testament.

Yea, I understand, man.

The Old Testament is a sick book, I agree. Things changed in the New Testament.

 

[Gart]

religion was the worlds greatest business idea.

 

[AaronOliver1993]

I believe in god, but i'm not christian, and after reading the bible multiple times i reject it as "god's teachings."

The bible has been translated so many times for the original texts, and during the days of the Roman Catholic Church, the only people who could read were the clergy, they could make the bible say whatever they wanted it to say, and no one could question it, because they couldn't fucking read.

So basically the church made the bible say "Give us money lol" and "Go to church and you'll live forever" (not in so many words of course)

However i do believe in god, there are so many anatomical impossibilities in the universe that science can't explain, and so many laws that science has put forth which contradict themselves when applied to anything except the small blue marble we live on. I am ignorant of how the universe came to be, but in my humble opinion, (and keep in mind, it is very humble) i think an all mighty being or, entity rather set the universe in motion, and it then became what it is today under this entity's supervision. That is what i believe, i cannot speak to the afterlife.