By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Pope: Gayness as dangerous as the rainforest being destroyed.

Concerning the fact that the clothes don't belong to jesus: once again it's well explained in the book, but it's pretty hard for me to explain in english, I'll do my best tough:

- First they made a simple analyze of the clothes fibers; result: clothes are 2000 years old.
- Then they analyze different elements that were on the clothes: sand and pollen if I remember right; result: clothes come from jesus region.
- Finally they cut the results from all the different items of clothes and they all matched well, so they belong to the same person.



Around the Network
Tremble said:
Concerning the fact that the clothes don't belong to jesus: once again it's well explained in the book, but it's pretty hard for me to explain in english, I'll do my best tough:

- First they made a simple analyze of the clothes fibers; result: clothes are 2000 years old.
- Then they analyze different elements that were on the clothes: sand and pollen if I remember right; result: clothes come from jesus region.
- Finally they cut the results from all the different items of clothes and they all matched well, so they belong to the same person.

Ok, so they narrowed it down to "Jesus region". How did they narrow it down to Jesus? Were there woodchips on the clothing?

 



Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.



Onyxmeth said:
Tremble said:
Concerning the fact that the clothes don't belong to jesus: once again it's well explained in the book, but it's pretty hard for me to explain in english, I'll do my best tough:

- First they made a simple analyze of the clothes fibers; result: clothes are 2000 years old.
- Then they analyze different elements that were on the clothes: sand and pollen if I remember right; result: clothes come from jesus region.
- Finally they cut the results from all the different items of clothes and they all matched well, so they belong to the same person.

Ok, so they narrowed it down to "Jesus region". How did they narrow it down to Jesus? Were there woodchips on the clothing?

 

My point exactly.  Some so-called archealogists would almost lead you to believe that there was a territory in the Roman world called Palestine, and this one guy named Jesus lived there.  Hence, if you find an item that carbon dates to 2000 years old, well, it must belong to Jesus.

It's voodoo science and wishful thinking.  It causes people to get excited, and when people get excited, they donate money to fund research and further archaelogical digs.

 



MarioKart:

Wii Code:

2278-0348-4368

1697-4391-7093-9431

XBOX LIVE: Comrade Tovya 2
PSN ID:

Comrade_Tovya

Sorry, I dunno what woodchips mean :D. To narrow it down to jesus, well, you know, they had a serious proof:

http://le.christ.free.fr/saint-suaire.gif



Tremble said:
I read a book talking about that (Cloner le Christ?). Jesus blood has been taken from its clothes. And yeah bloodtype's result was "AB".

 Let's assume for just one second that this could possibly be true (which I seriously doubt) I have to wonder what on earth does Jesus having type AB blood prove? How is it any stronger evidence for or against a virgin birth? There is no reason he couldn't come out with type AB blood unless Mary had a different type of blood which we can't prove. Looking beyond that there is no reason to even attempt to prove what blood type Mary had. She gave birth to boy meaning there was at least one extra chromosome introduced into her womb. If you can get past the fact that the sex of the child was opposite the mother's then there really isn't any other serious evidence against a virgin birth.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

Around the Network

I can't believe I'm joining this argument.

If Mary is AB, then she would've given an A or a B, not both...

Er... who am I kidding.

All you have to do is believe, say "I do believe", and switch between clapping your hands and raising them up with a "Hallelujah!"



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.

steven787 said:
I can't believe I'm joining this argument.

If Mary is AB, then she would've given an A or a B, not both...

Er... who am I kidding.

All you have to do is believe, say "I do believe", and switch between clapping your hands and raising them up with a "Hallelujah!"

 Well there is two possible ways for her to give birth. Either it is essentially a clone of her due to an odd biological error, or it is "divine sperm." If it was self cloning then if Mary had AB blood so would the child. This is impossible though as Mary completely lacks a y chromosome necessary to have a male child. If we assume "divine sperm" then there is a second set of genes to pull from and type AB blood is possible.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

Or Joseph knocked her up pre-wedding and when everyone found out she was knocked up they made up the story and he graciously "believed" her.



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.

Does anyone actually believe that Mary remained a virgin after she gave birth to Jesus?

I mean come on, it says several times in the New Testament that Jesus has a brother, James, and not just in a metaphorical way. There is also evidence that James was a very important member in the early Christian (or technically Jesusbewegung) movement.

Not to mention Mary was a woman, in a time when woman had almost no power. Does anyone believe that she could successfully tell her husband the entire time they were married that they couldn't have sex? Some women were killed for that in those days.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

steven787 said:
Or Joseph knocked her up pre-wedding and when everyone found out she was knocked up they made up the story and he graciously "believed" her.

 I don't really buy it either. But the blood type is not what disproves it. Not by a long shot. The sex of the baby is the proof in the pudding that takes it from possible biological anamoly to pure myth.

 @Akuma
Don't forget about his brother Bob. More interestingly to me is that most people ignore the fact that it is extremely likely that he had a family of his own at some point. I don't get the point of trying to remove any and all family that was almost certainly there from history.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229