REPLY #32 TO|
Boldfaced statements are parts of the original essay (or a subsequent reply) to which the respondent has directed his comments.
Italicized/emphasized comments prefaced by (R) are those of the respondent and are presented unedited.
My replies appear under the respondent's comments in blue text and are prefaced by my initials (MB).
(R) just stumbled across your website, will make time later to check it out
more but for now I must ask, have you read "the jesus conspiracy" or books
of this nature? Jesus was in fact the third christ in his lifetime, the
new testament has many quotations when thebrainwashed of paul(christians)
stumbled across churches already constructed in the name of john the
baptist, this is where the famous saying arose. Your baptist isnt worthy
to even wash the feet of my jesus..
(MB) I've read many books and articles on the subject. It is rather apparent
that even so basic an issue as whether or not there actually was an historical
Jesus raises considerable debate. There is considerable informed opinion that
"Jesus" was invented by those who founded Christianity and that the Gospel
writers only codified the stories used by those people to spread their
(R) and by the way, the turin shroud is indeed a fake, not because of
radiocarbon dating, but for a more simple reason, the blood flows on the soles
of the feet all move towards the toes, the shroud was put on the body after
crucifixion, the blood is defying gravity by flowing upwards.
(MB) While I have no doubts that the Shroud of Turin is a fake, there is another
explanation for the blood on the feet seeming to flow upwards. While Jesus was
still on the cross, the blood would have been flowing towards the toes of his
feet and it is very likely that some would have still been on his feet when he
was removed from the cross. Any cloth that would have been laid over his body
may have picked up the blood on his feet, thus, giving the impression that it
was flowing upwards. Also, consider that blood would not have flowed after he
was dead, so any blood on the Shroud would have to have been picked up from that
which was already on the body prior to the time of death.
Therefore, I don't think that the argument you have offered can successfully be
used as disproof of any authenticity of the Shroud. Fortunately, there are many
other disproofs available -- to include the historical confession of the person
who created it back in the 1300's.
Created with Allaire HomeSite 4.0 .......... Last Update: 04 Jun 98
Earthlink Network Home Page
Go to next reply
Return to "Religion" essay
Back to Philosophy page