Posted on 07/16/2018 12:19:27 AM PDT by Simon Green
Please help yourself to the “Fifth Gospel of The Shroud”, I must stick with the sealed Word.
.
Everything you have posted is contrary to the word.
Only loons seek to dismiss this obvious act of Yehova.
What are you scared of?
.
Everything you have posted is contrary to the word.
Only loons seek to dismiss this obvious act of Yehova.
What are you scared of?
Making an idol out of an image, which is contrary to God’s commandment?
Do we believe in the risen Christ or an image of it? I’ll take Him. He is the Word Made Flesh.
“I am the LORD your God,
who brought you out of the land of Egypt,
out of the house of bondage.
You shall have no other gods before me.
You shall not make for yourself a graven image,
or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above,
or that is in the earth beneath,
or that is in the water under the earth;
you shall not bow down to them or serve them.” (Ex 20:2-5)
Only loons forget the 1st Commandment?
.
You’re the one with the other God.
You worship the devisive critics.
.
If you can show me where any of the Disciples needed the Shroud to preach the kingdom or evangelize, I’m with you.
But that didn’t happen, because as the Word says,
‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.”!
So you got... nothing...
... but an interesting, in not cunning image on a piece of cloth of which God commands us not to idolize.
.
You’re a real head case!
Your every argument is oblique to reality.
When you make personal attacks, it is the sign you’ve lost the argument.
.
Stating a fact is not an attack.
Nice try.
Calling people you do not know on the internet names is a personal attack, with no basis in reality.
Plus, it’s lame.
And stupid.
What do you think Jesus was referring to when he asked His disciples to look at and touch His hands and feet, just the fact He had hands and feet? He was referencing the fact the wounds of the crucifixition were still present, not healed or even closed. He had Thomas place his hand in His side wound where the Roman soldier had thrust the lancia.
Jesus is not giving the an anatomy lesson. He is not recapitulating Biblical lessons from Genesis where it was revealed that Life is in the blood. He knew they already knew that.
The Bible also says that it is not a complete record of everything that Jesus said and did, so don’t assume that it has to be the complete record of what Jesus said and did or Jesus is being deceitful. It is not so he is not. There is no “error of omission,” because some things are just assumed to be known as true by everyone and don’t need to be said.
Hey, I’m on my way out but the Spirit stopped me...
I apologize for calling your argument “stupid”... I should have left it at “lame”.
I didn’t need to dig in on you, you have had some good political insights in the past; I just have no need for the Shroud.
For someone more interested in the Word, than the artifact of the Shroud, you sure post a lot of completely outdated noise from the skeptics sites that has been long debunked. In fact, most of it was long debunked by previous science at the time the skeptics first wrote it in their magazines and books because they simply chose to ignore the science that had already been done. I post the counter facts to point out that fact.
Your litany of early observations of photographic chemicals, although not under those names, is pointless when there are no photographic chemical residues ever found on the Shroud to hold an image no matter how many may have been discovered by medieval alchemists or artists, who did nothing remotely photographic with them, nor, in fact wrote anything about such use. That’s sort of akin to saying the Shroud could have been an early Polaroid photo in a minute because the basic chemicals used in Polaroid cameras were first found in 1100AD, and someone maybe could have made a giant camera obscura Polaroid back then . . .
This boring thread started by the assertions that because Jesus omitted the word “blood’ and did not say He was made out of “flesh and blood” but rather, flesh and bones, that this was some indicator that He wanted the disciples to know He didn’t have any blood in His body. Just bones. And bloodless flesh. Or something.
The other original assertion or assumption was that Jesus’ blood was magically taken up to Heaven, in total, while He was dying on the cross.
That’s why I keep hitting back at these arguments... there was blood in Christ’s body after He died, as the spear proved.
Later GBU
I bow to your up to date analysis, with respect for your respect for historicity, but I still don’t need the Shroud in my Christian wheelhouse.
Who made the image on the Shroud? God or man? If man, then you might have a case. If God, then the admonition has no bearing.
I guess I’m going to have to say “man” simply because I don’t see the Bible evidence or explanation for it.
Or need of it for our walk with the Lord?
Sorta like trying to prove a negative, but he traces this strange doctrine of a bloodless resurrected Christ back through history.
This notion that Christ has no Blood in His Resurrection Body is based on an argument from silence,
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3671798/posts
http://shamelesspopery.com/does-the-glorified-body-of-christ-have-blood/
For the sake of your belief in the Shroud, you would naturally agree with me, that Christ did NOT have all His blood drained from the body before He died on the Cross/after He was risen.
Why are you compelled to misclassify discussion of The Shroud as ‘need’ ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.