Shroud of Turin: Absolute proof the man in the Shroud is Jesus Christ

[brian100]

I showed you the Hearts.. u have to be blind not to see it.

 

[JRT]

Its not possible to believe in Jesus and at the same time disbelieve in his miracles. No way.

My belief in Jesus is completely unaffected by being unconvinced that the Shroud is indeed a miracle. To me it is an intriguing scientific and historical puzzle. I know more of it now than when I first learned of it 60 years ago and I may go to my death with the puzzle unsolved. That frustrates me a bit.

 

[brian100]

Yeah, when people say this Catholic Shroud thing of a Catholic Jesus don't matter I get an itch that can't scratch.

 

[Lamb]

Yeah, when people say this Catholic Shroud thing of a Catholic Jesus don't matter I get an itch that can't scratch.

It bothers me when people try to tell others that an object is going to give them eternal life instead of Jesus the Savior. Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith who for the joy set before Him, endured the cross, scorning its shame and sat down on the right hand of the throne God.

 

[brian100]

No what happens is when people see Catholic stuff on the Shroud of Christ they cover their eyes and pretend its not there.

 

[Lamb]

No what happens is when people see Catholic stuff on the Shroud of Christ they cover their eyes and pretend its not there.

My husband is Catholic so you're wrong there.

 

[Bluezone777]

Even if I saw the symbols, it still won't mean anything to me nor would it prove anything to me. Scripture doesn't speak of those symbols or the shroud. If the scriptures don't have anything to say on it then that shroud and its potential symbols have no authoritative power that a Christian should submit to. A lot of Catholic teaching is not based on scripture and is merely the traditions of men.

If scriptures speak of the importance of thsoe symbols or the shroud then please feel free to share the chapter(s) and verse(s)with us so I and anyone else can go over them.

 

[tango]

The bible don't prove God. However the Shroud does! And which religion he is.

No way you can be Christian believing in his resurrection and then to deny the Shroud is authentic. These people do not make it.
Jesus called them blind guides.

Its not possible to believe in Jesus and at the same time disbelieve in his miracles. No way.

You're making a bunch of totally unrelated statements and then trying to weave them together to prove something that they don't support.

It's perfectly possible to believe Jesus walked this earth as a man and yet not believe he did any miracles. Modern Jews don't dispute the existence of a historical man named Jesus but they don't believe he was anybody special. I gather some believe Jesus was a rabbi, some believe he was just a regular guy like you or I. I'm excluding Messianic Jews here.

It's perfectly possible to believe that Jesus was highly anointed by God, performed many miracles, but did not die and rise again. This is a position similar to that held by many Muslims, who believe Jesus was a great prophet but not divine.

It's perfectly possible to believe Jesus was divine, that he died for our sins and rose again, and that the Turin shroud is just a bit of curious fabric that has no significance whatsoever.

Seriously, for the quality of reasoning you're showing here you might as well dig up a vial of red liquid from somewhere near Golgotha, claim it must be Christ's blood because he was crucified there, and then claim anyone disbelieving your assertion without evidence lacks faith in God.

 

[tango]

It bothers me when people try to tell others that an object is going to give them eternal life instead of Jesus the Savior. Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith who for the joy set before Him, endured the cross, scorning its shame and sat down on the right hand of the throne God.

Very true. All this stuff about the shroud is interesting but it's not as if a bit of old cloth is going to acquire mystical powers. It reminds me of the story in (I think) 1 Kings where the bronze serpent that Moses originally fashioned was being worshipped so one of the kings had it broken into three pieces. I don't have my Bible on hand or I'd look up the reference but from what I recall they named it Nehushtan. It runs in my mind it was King Hezekiah who had it broken.

 

[brian100]

Well if you think the Shroud has 0 value and has no bearing on your belief, would you risk saying that for losing eternal life? Jesus made it clear his miracles proved who he was.

 

[tango]

Well if you think the Shroud has 0 value and has no bearing on your belief, would you risk saying that for losing eternal life? Jesus made it clear his miracles proved who he was.

Jesus' miracles proved who he was. The fact he died and rose again is the foundation of our faith, not a bit of cloth that may or may not have housed his body. Whether the shroud is the burial cloths that held his body or just some random bit of cloth from hundreds of years later doesn't change the death and resurrection of Jesus.

You're mixing and matching logic again, making statements that have no basis in anything from Scripture. If Jesus had wanted us to give such great credence to the bits of cloth that once wrapped his body I'm sure he was quite capable of telling his disciples all about it. But he didn't mention them before his death or after his resurrection. Not even once. They barely get a mention in Scripture, but now suddenly we're supposed to revere some bit of cloth because a random person on the internet says so, despite the gaping holes in the reasoning?

My eternal life is based on Jesus dying for my sins and rising again, not a scrap of cloth that may or may not have housed his body in the interim.

 

[brian100]

You would not know he rose from the dead without the Shroud.

 

[tango]

You would not know he rose from the dead without the Shroud.

Mary and the disciples managed pretty well. There isn't a single word in Scripture about a shadow-like marking on the burial clothes, merely that Mary spoke with him, the disciples walked with him, and the cloths that once wrapped him were noted as being folded and not another word is said about them.

The shroud proves nothing. It could be the burial shroud of Jesus Christ, it could be an elaborate fraud, it could be anything. Scripture doesn't say "If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe that this bit of cloth was once wrapped around his body you will be saved". It says something about believing he rose from the dead, with not a single word mentioning bits of cloth.

 

[Bluezone777]

Well if you think the Shroud has 0 value and has no bearing on your belief, would you risk saying that for losing eternal life? Jesus made it clear his miracles proved who he was.

When He said this, He was referring to miracles He performed while on Earth not anything that occurred after He left post resurrection nor anything found later that could be reasonably attributed to someone else. The people who were refusing to listen to him while on Earth were clearly playing dumb and simply refused to submit to God's authority hence why they rejected Him and later crucified Him.

 

[brian100]

You are only denying the Shroud because it has Catholic markings from God on it. Before me, people would say it could be any person!

 

[tango]

You are only denying the Shroud because it has Catholic markings from God on it. Before me, people would say it could be any person!

After your posts people are still saying it could be any person.

 

[Lamb]

You would not know he rose from the dead without the Shroud.

You're wrong about that. We know His is risen because of the scriptures that speak of it and by grace through faith we believe. The shroud is not needed for man to believe, you see. We believe because God's Word does not return to Him empty.

 

[brian100]

No the Sacred Heart proves its 100% Jesus Christ, and if you calculate the odds on the Immaculate Heart being there too,, its goes up to 1000% its him.

I'm the only person to prove who he was. Science could only prove no man has made that.

 

[Bluezone777]

For someone who supposedly proved who he was, you are having an awfully hard time getting even one person on here to agree with you. I'd say you hardly proved anything because if you did then you would have at least one person agreeing with you but you don't.

 

[Lamb]

No the Sacred Heart proves its 100% Jesus Christ, and if you calculate the odds on the Immaculate Heart being there too,, its goes up to 1000% its him.

I'm the only person to prove who he was. Science could only prove no man has made that.

No, you haven't proven anything besides your opinion. You've never even touched the garb, have you?