*NEW findings* Critical re-evaluation of the Turin Shroud - evidence for 1st Century Dating

[illegalbeagle]

Lol this satanic tactic again when you know you're wrong. Can you at least change it up?

First of all, what I'm telling you is true according to God's Word not Adventists or any other Christian denomination. So bringing up Adventism is not going to change God's truth is it hmm?

Secondly, you know I am not part of the Adventist Church, I go to an independent church. Having said that most adventist people will agree with me because this is according to biblical doctrine. I'm not sure about the people who run the church though. There a lot of problems on that front as the Advent Messenger pointed out and keeps pointing out. They too are independent.

Nice try, but trying to deviate from God's truth failed again!

Lets focus on God's truth.

I'll say it again.


Phipps knows.

 

[illegalbeagle]

I believe the Catholic Church evidence. Because, secular news (maZ0nic) will never tell the miraculous Christian truths! They have an assignment- to hide God from us. That is their job. Any retired people care to listen? I have to go to work 12 hours. lol. This is a two part series. Three reputable labs (USA/Europe) tested and revealed the scientific evidence, first showed up in France, as burial cloth, it then took various trips, went through a serious of ownerships, House of Savoy. Father Spitzer has gone through all historic research until the (recents) 1978 and (1988- carbon dating sample was deceitful, investigations sample was discredited as a repaired thread that had suffered corrosion, repairs done by nuns). Until 2004, all four other dating tests were done, it was created around 50 AD. with mountains of materials/electron microscopic physicist (and thermochemical chemists) studies and fibrals identified proof subjected to several different test, at the end of spectromitry. The cloth is linen, (not cotton), twill and weave during the time of Jesus, folded by our ancestors with face and body showing, iconographic evidence, making sure burial cloth was adequately preserved, with wounds showing.

It's MASONIC. You can spell it they ain't fussed you know?
Nobody's gonna SWAT your house, watch.

Jews run the world.
Muslims are stupid.
Catholics are Paedos.
Government are scum.
Police are Pigs.
Gays are deluded.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Lol this satanic tactic again when you know you're wrong. Can you at least change it up?

First of all, what I'm telling you is true according to God's Word not Adventists or any other Christian denomination. So bringing up Adventism is not going to change God's truth is it hmm?

Secondly, you know I am not part of the Adventist Church, I go to an independent church. Having said that most adventist people will agree with me because this is according to biblical doctrine. I'm not sure about the people who run the church though. There a lot of problems on that front as the Advent Messenger pointed out and keeps pointing out. They too are independent.

Nice try, but trying to deviate from God's truth failed again!

Lets focus on God's truth.

I was only asking if that was a position you agreed with?

I’m a scientist by training as one of my other threads might indicate:

Narrative, Theory and the Scientific Method

Science is objective… At least, that’s what we’re told. But there are inherent issues with this statement that can cause very real confusion. How can two rational, intelligent people look at the same piece of evidence and offer different explanations for their observations—and not just...

vigilantcitizenforums.com

I have previously not put any great hopes that the Shroud was genuine, but have re-evaluated my position based on the recent evidence.

 

[illegalbeagle]

I was only asking if that was a position you agreed with?

I’m a scientist by training as one of my other threads might indicate:

Narrative, Theory and the Scientific Method

Science is objective… At least, that’s what we’re told. But there are inherent issues with this statement that can cause very real confusion. How can two rational, intelligent people look at the same piece of evidence and offer different explanations for their observations—and not just...

vigilantcitizenforums.com

I have previously not put any great hopes that the Shroud was genuine, but have re-evaluated my position based on the recent evidence.

It probably belonged to the rich man who's tomb it belonged to, Jesus was in there with him, cant remember his name.

Or I might be wrong.

I know I dont buy that shroud shit though, as much as i do that the sinking of the titanic was legit.

 

[phipps]

@Red Sky at Morning

I was only asking if that was a position you agreed with?

No you weren't. You always bring up Adventism when you know you're wrong on a certain subject, think I'm wrong, don't understand the subject matter I post about etc. Its a tactic you've used on me a few times so don't act innocent. You think that I will defend the Adventist church even when they are wrong but I don't and won't. They were wrong to send young people of the church to the Taize Community which is an "ecumenical fraternity made up of celibate monks who are Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican and Evangelical." And the rest that the article posted.

You think Adventism is my weak point. Its a small Church after all and they do do things differently from most Christian denominations like observe the Sabbath on Saturday instead of Sunday for example but that does not mean they are wrong. Not according to God's Word. You are in the majority in terms of your beliefs but as I have always pointed out, and it goes hand in hand with biblical teaching too, the truth of God is never with the majority. In spiritual matters the majority are sadly mostly wrong.

Adventism is my strongest point actually. It is more true to biblical doctrine than any Christian denomination I know of. I left the actual church because some of the people running the church are bringing in false doctrine like the article you posted from Advent messenger. Its been infiltrated by bad people (some say Jesuits) who are trying to destroy it from within. I still believe in the core Adventist message because its doctrine is the most biblically sound.

I’m a scientist by training as one of my other threads might indicate:

Does science do away with God's truth? God's Word is more important than any scientific studies. If science contradicts God's Word, we ought to choose God's Word over science.

I have previously not put any great hopes that the Shroud was genuine, but have re-evaluated my position based on the recent evidence.

The Shroud whether genuine or not is of no importance biblically. Its a material thing and is pointless in our spiritual growth. Jesus urges us to walk by faith not by sight. Having His grace, salvation and Him in our hearts is what is important.

This is the uncompromising truth according to God's Word for all of us.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

@Red Sky at Morning
“The Shroud whether genuine or not is of no importance biblically. It’s a material thing and is pointless in our spiritual growth. Jesus urges us to walk by faith not by sight. Having His grace, salvation and Him in our hearts is what is important.

This is the uncompromising truth according to God's Word for all of us.”

I am making no judgement on what status believers ought to afford to the Shroud.

I do believe you can have a “reasonable faith” insofar as you can take a reasoned look at the Bible and find history, archeology, scientific findings etc etc to support it.

My faith is not in the Shroud but in the One who briefly resided there.

Some evidence is primarily a witness to doubters and unbelievers. For example, my faith does not rest of the finding of a genuine site for Noah’s Ark, yet such a site might shake an atheist materialist to the core and cause such a person to rethink their unbelief.

 

[phipps]

@Red Sky at Morning

I am making no judgement on what status believers ought to afford to the Shroud.

And I am pointing out that as Christians who believe God's Word is the truth, the shroud should not be afforded any status at all as its not even mentioned in scripture at all in terms of salvation because its not important.

I do believe you can have a “reasonable faith” insofar as you can take a reasoned look at the Bible and find history, archeology, scientific findings etc etc to support it.

Yes, history, science, archaeology etc should go hand in hand with biblical doctrine. If they don't as Christians we should discard it immediately.

My faith is not in the Shroud but in the One who briefly resided there.

So why put so much importance on it and what science proves about it?

Some evidence is primarily a witness to doubters and unbelievers. For example, my faith does not rest of the finding of a genuine site for Noah’s Ark, yet such a site might shake an atheist materialist to the core and cause such a person to rethink their unbelief.

As Christians we are to preach the truth according to God's Word. The shroud does not come into it I'm afraid. Its completely pointless.

Goodbye.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

@Red Sky at Morning


And I am pointing out that as Christians who believe God's Word is the truth, the shroud should not be afforded any status at all as its not even mentioned in scripture at all in terms of salvation because its not important.


Yes, history, science, archaeology etc should go hand in hand with biblical doctrine. If they don't as Christians we should discard it immediately.


So why put so much importance on it and what science proves about it?


As Christians we are to preach the truth according to God's Word. The shroud does not come into it I'm afraid. Its completely pointless.

Goodbye.

Fare well Phipps - may the Lord bless you and keep you.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Gary Habermas weighs in on the recent evidence: