Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Science is great, but common sense should not be dropped along the way. If one demands external proof of oral tradition giving rise to the Gospel, shouldn't one also demand external proof that someone sat down and wrote something "creatively" (or apart from any oral tradition)? What extern...

PS: The most sober, well-reasoned assessment of pros and cons on the Shroud is here , with further excursuses here . Not that I want to revive the argument here, only to point out (to those who are seriously interested) a full summative view of what things have been raised on both sides and carefull...

Looks like shroud specialists talk about vertical directionality and the production of the image, at least here and here . This has all been very interesting, but I will leave the further researching to those who want to do it. My original point was that IF the shroud is another witness to gospel ev...

To JW: 1) Credible, multiple, independent carbon dating to 14th century? No: See this . As I said at the very beginning of this thread: "The radio-carbon dating of a repair-flap from the edge of the cloth does not disauthenticate the Shroud." 2) Epic failure for every standard forensic tes...

To isk:

I see your main argument: "I don't like the Church; it has done bad things...therefore the Shroud is fake."

Iron-clad!

To KK: Beware the bias of the Wikipedia article. The shroud cannot be a painting, science has proven. The truth is out there...that is, seek and ye shall find. It is funny that you purposefully ignore that the Wikipedia article cites the final dismissals of the alleged "proof" that the sh...

The truth is out here: Redemption is a fraud. Theologies and rhetorics of redemption differ. What one takes to be hyperbolic rhetoric to promote conversion another takes as literal truth. Most believers would finally agree that it is not in the last analysis up to us, though we are given the opport...

To isk: Abusus non tollit usum.

To KK: Beware the bias of the Wikipedia article. The shroud cannot be a painting, science has proven. The truth is out there...that is, seek and ye shall find.

I must admit that my main interest in this thread is how so many people, some of them even scientists, cling to this kind of story which is an obvious fake. "Obvious fake" is quite dubious. An obvious fake would be easy to discredit or disprove. Not so with this shroud. Since you are inte...

Leaving aside for a moment that we are most probably looking at a medieval prop that was used to defraud people, you are aware that tens of thousands of Jews were crucified in Judea of the first century? I'm not at all sure of that figure of tens of thousands, but let's just go on to ask how many h...