Thread: Question for ATHIESTS

Any one is welcome to answer (even Christians)

Explain me how Jesus's shroud happened to empty with picture of him on it?
Here's info for dummies:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_tomb
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin

"Explain me how Jesus's shroud happened to empty with picture of him on it?"
Is English your first language? This makes no sense.

He's referring to the empty tomb and the Shroud of Turin, which refers to the resurrection of Jesus. What's more, he's asking how Atheists remain Atheists with these things.

The Shroud of Turin was made in the 1400s. Carbon dating doesn't lie, sorry.

And no one knows where Jesus' tomb is. He was a criminal, he would not have been put in a proper tomb.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

The Shroud of Turin was made in the 1400s. Carbon dating doesn't lie, sorry.

And no one knows where Jesus' tomb is. He was a criminal, he would not have been put in a proper tomb.

Even if it was made in the exact time Jesus lived. It would prove nothing

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Even if it was made in the exact time Jesus lived. It would prove nothing

Even if it was actually Jesus, it would prove nothing

Originally Posted by Jorge

Criminal?

The reason for Jesus' crucifixion was because he claimed to be the son of God, which was blasphemy. And since blasphemy was considered a crime, he was treated as a criminal.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

The Shroud of Turin was made in the 1400s. Carbon dating doesn't lie, sorry.

And no one knows where Jesus' tomb is. He was a criminal, he would not have been put in a proper tomb.

Criminal?

Originally Posted by Jorge

Criminal?

He committed a crime according to the time's law. He was, thus, a criminal.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Even if it was made in the exact time Jesus lived. It would prove nothing

But it wasn't, it was made 1400 years after Jesus was born.

Originally Posted by Jorge

Criminal?

He was a criminal in both Jewish and Roman law. What do you think he was crucified for? They didn't crucify people just for the hell of it.

Originally Posted by StasConstantine

Explain me how Jesus's shroud happened to empty with picture of him on it?
Here's info for dummies:

Because it didn't.

Dummy.

Originally Posted by StasConstantine

Explain me how Jesus's shroud happened to empty with picture of him on it?

It was Eric Estrada's will.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

crucify people just for the hell of it.

Ha ha ha ha ha

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

It was Eric Estrada's will.

OMG, it's a mi-ra-cle!!

All hail the magic toast!

come on guys :/

I heard that the parts of the shroud they tested were 'contaminated,' because they tested the corners and people had handled it by the corners...

and the catholic church won't allow any more testing.

I WONDER WHY.

Yea I heard that as well. They said that the corner of it was damaged in a fire(which was documented), and later on it was repaired by the nuns who were holding it. So you can tell the corner is different from the rest of it, because of the mixture of fibers used in the repaired part compared to the rest of the shroud.

It sounds fairly reasonable for something that has been around that long(if it was). Why they will not redo the test on another section however, is beyond me. However the church has for the most part avoided ever commenting on if its real or not. Which makes it seem as though they even find it questionable.

also CARBON DATING DOES LIE SOMETIMES

Originally Posted by StasConstantine

also CARBON DATING DOES LIE SOMETIMES

No it doesn't. Science > religion. pwn'd... also banned

Originally Posted by StasConstantine

also CARBON DATING DOES LIE SOMETIMES

On the odd occasion that it does 'lie' due to contaminated samples, we're well aware of the potential for contamination and can take it into account so we can give an accurate dating. These people are experts in their fields. They are smarter than you, smarter than me.

"An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made, in a narrow field."
- Niels Bohr

The Shroud of Turin may very well be the greatest hoax that Leonardo Da Vinci ever pulled on the Church, and I applaud the man for his genius. Truly ahead of his time.

Originally Posted by Alextanium

These people are experts in their fields. They are smarter than you, smarter than me.

That's just an appeal to authority.

Scientists are possessed by Satan and are trying to cover up the truth.

Damn scientists, tampering with the WILL OF GOD.

Originally Posted by Mark75

That's just an appeal to authority.

*warning Robinson family - incorrect use of logical fallacy*

An expert in a field -by definition - has access to more knowledge than you do regarding their field of study. As such, their opinion carries more evidential weight than yours or mine does purely because they are more well informed and more versed in their field.

A classic appeal to authority would be to say you should adopt Einsteins views on theology because he's Einstein (ie: a very smart man). But Einstein wasn't trained in theology, he was trained in theoretical astrophysics. Therefore his opinion is no more useful on the subject of theology than yours or mine - hence the logical fallacy.

Saying that an expert has a more valid opinion on their branch of science is valid, not fallacious.

Strangely enough, Einstien, as smart as he was, believed in god.

Originally Posted by Alextanium

An expert in a field -by definition - has access to more knowledge than you do regarding their field of study. As such, their opinion carries more evidential weight than yours or mine does purely because they are more well informed and more versed in their field.

Their opinion is more valid only if it's more accurate or well supported (which we should typically expect to be the case from an expert.) The fact that they are an expert or smart is still irrelevant. The relevant factor is not their "expertness" but rather the truth of their claims. Their expert status should not be considered. If a non-expert can correctly show the expert's claims false, even within the expert's field, the non-expert is still correct. The only reason their opinions are more likely to (but not inherently) carry more evidential weight is because they're most probably just more valid and informed opinions to begin with, not due to their "expertness". At no point should the level of expertise be compared. Only the validity of the claims.

Originally Posted by Alextanium

On the odd occasion that it does 'lie' due to contaminated samples, we're well aware of the potential for contamination and can take it into account so we can give an accurate dating. These people are experts in their fields. They are smarter than you, smarter than me.

"An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made, in a narrow field."
- Niels Bohr

The Shroud of Turin may very well be the greatest hoax that Leonardo Da Vinci ever pulled on the Church, and I applaud the man for his genius. Truly ahead of his time.

Carbon dating can be wrong sometimes, but the nice thing about science is that it's repeatable. If a result is wrong, subsequent results will show that. If many teams of different scientists each doing different tests all come to the conclusion that it's from the 1400s, then it's from the 1400s. Science pwns religion.

Good Bohr quote btw

@nerve: we have one, but we ban so many people that making it public would just become a clusterfuck.