Let me tell you about it.
Summary of scientific and historical evidence supporting the authenticity of the Shroud:
http://www.newgeology.us/Shroud.pdf
Shroud-like coloration of linen by nanosecond laser pulses in the vacuum ultraviolet (it explains that they replicated the shroud's qualities using laser pulsations, which so far is the only way anyone has been able the replicate the shroud's qualities):
http://www.sindone.info/DILAZZA3.pdf
Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of Turin:
http://www.shroud.it/ROGERS-3.pdf
Nuclear imaging:
http://shroud.com/pdfs/whanger.pdf
http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/accett2.pdf
3D holographic information:
http://www.khouse.org/articles/2009/847/
http://www.ohioshroudconference.com/papers/p24.pdf
Raymond N. Rogers' observations and conclusions:
http://shroudnm.com/docs/2013-01-10-Yannick-Cl%C3%A9ment-Reflections-on-Ray-Rogers-Shroud-Work.pdf
Here's some secular peer-reviewed scientific journal articles on the Shroud of Turin:
http://shroud.typepad.com/topics/2005/10/secular_peerrev.html
Also, here is ancient evidence for Jesus from non-Christian sources:
http://storage.cloversites.com/fcfgroups/documents/Why%20We%20Believe%207.pdf
>>969295
It's just a medieval man rapped in a shroud. Spook.
>>969295
>b-but the 1988 tests dated it back to the 13th century!
The sample was cut from a corner of the Shroud which was part of a later repair, the dating contradicts other evidence, the sample may also have been contaminated by bacteria, smoke or reactive carbon and further evidence shows that the calculations were done incorrectly. You can verify all of my statements.
The three dating labs, according to a scientific protocol agreed upon in 1985, were supposed to cut several samples of the Shroud from different locations. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. Instead, the scientific adviser to the Arch Diocese of Turin, Luigi Gonnella, decided to violate the protocol and allowed only one sample to be cut from an outside corner where it had been handled hundreds of times over the centuries as it was held up for public viewing.
This flawed examination was actually discredited by Dr. Ray Rogers who published in the January, 2005 issue of Thermochimica Acta. Dr. Rogers stated, in part, ''The radiocarbon sample was thus not part of the original cloth and is invalid for determining the age of the shroud.''
New tests that have been carried out in the University of Padua's laboratories by professors from various Italian universities, led by Giulio Fanti, Italian professor of mechanical and thermal measurement at the University of Padua’s engineering faculty, have dated the fibres from the cloth to a period between 300BC to 400AD.
>>969299
See >>969301
The Shroud of Turin’s images are superficial and fully contained within a thin layer of starch fractions and saccharides that coats the outermost fibers of the Shroud. The color is a caramel-like substance, probably the product of an amino/carbonyl reaction. Where there is no image, the carbohydrate coating is clear. There is also a very faint image of the face on the reverse side of the Shroud of Turin which lines up with the image on the front of the cloth. There is no image content between the two superficial image layers indicating that nothing soaked through to form the image on the other side.
Until recently, it was widely believed that the images on the Shroud of Turin were produced by something which resulted in oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of the polysaccharide structure of the linen fibers. This is incorrect. The coating, whether imaged or clear, can be reduced with diimide or removed with adhesive leaving clear cellulose fiber.
The images as they appear on the Shroud of Turin are said to be negative because when photographed the resulting negative is a positive image.
The Turin Shroud was examined with visible and ultraviolet spectrometry, infrared spectrometry, x-ray fluorescence spectrometry, thermography, pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry, lasermicroprobe Raman analyses, and microchemical testing. No evidence for pigments (paint, dye or stains) or artist’s media was found anywhere on the Shroud of Turin.
mfw atheists will ignore these facts and keep pretending it's a ''medieval fake'' even though it's IMPOSSIBLE for the Holy Shroud to have been produced without modern technology and the fact that Jesus Christ was always shown with nails in his palms in artwork unlike the Shroud.
1:01:36 - 1:25:29
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNJPJ4JwHeE
>>969316
>>969309
Still, it's not really anything to be excited about. Such a spook.
>>969318
Those blood particles have been tested and proven to be human blood.
>>969321
>>969327
>>969332
>>969316
First of all, the cloth is dated from 300 BC to 400 AD, it could've been anyone that was rapped in that shroud.
>>969320
The Holy Shroud is literally physical evidence of Jesus Christ's divinity and remember that it has never been reproduced without using paint or modern technology.
1:01:36 - 1:25:29
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNJPJ4JwHeE
>>969309
Dude, I'm a Catholic, and you have no idea how excited this shit gets me. Like, my stomach starts to churn a little. I just can't believe though, you know? It'd be too good.
>>969335
Sure, countless men wore a crown of thorns, then got scourged with this >>969333 then also got crucified AND ALSO pierced on the left side with a lance.
Read this if you dare to challenge your atheism:
The Authentication of the Turin Shroud: An Issue in Archaeological Epistemology by William Meacham - Archaeologist CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY - Vol. 24 - N° 3 - (June 1983) Published by the University of Chicago Press
https://www.shroud.com/meacham2.htm
>>969337
>literally physical evidence of Jesus
>never been reproduced without using paint or modern technology
It could be anyone in that shroud, what makes you so sure its >muh Jebus
> It's a fake, but I can't tell you how!
>>969342
I am also Catholic and I'm telling you, you have to believe because it really is his burial cloth. The 1988 bogus tests are literally the only reason why it's not talked about often.
Watch this:
1:01:36 - 1:25:29
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNJPJ4JwHeE
>>969295
>the lost technology of lasers
>>969346
Not an atheist, really an apatheist but there's been numerous accounts where people were given crowns of thorns and stabbed on the leftside, it merely is, probably is, just a coincidence.
>>969379
>dat denial
>>969379
>apatheist
Do you currently believe in the existence of a God, yes or no? No? You're an atheist then.
My faith in Christianity doesn't rest on the authenticity of the shroud, but I must say it's really, really interesting.
>>969393
There might be a God, though I don't really care if there is. It's not like it did anything for me.
>>969293
It's not Jesus.
Jesus had separate linen wraps for his body, and a handkerchief for his head.
When John went into the tomb, the linen cloths were still wrapped together, and the head piece neatly folded separately.
It's not Jesus.
>>969408
Neither does mine but it sure as hell reinforces it.
The Shroud of Turin is literally Jesus Christ's burial cloth. It is the ultimate proof of his divinity and the Father imprinted that 3D holographic information there on purpose during his resurrection for later generations to see.
Atheists love saying:
''where's your evidence?'' and ''where's your proof?''
The Shroud is that physical evidence which atheists can even touch.
>>969438
>Jesus had separate linen wraps for his body, and a handkerchief for his head.
This is false.
Read this:
''A Clean Cloth'', What Greek Word Usage Tells Us about the Burial Wrappings of Jesus, Diana Fulbright, Director of Research, Shroud of Turin Center
https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n62part7.pdf
>>969342
Yeah, you pagans are all about relics, fingerbones, toe bones, skulls, skeletons, etc. Disgusting.
>>969337
> neither way [movement of light] could have created the image on the shroud
SHEEEEEIT
You're pathetic. If you really had faith there was a God you wouldn't need a false idol like this to really make you sure.
I hope you burn in hell
>>969393
>Its so simple guise
This thread is cancer
Supposed to be a decent discussion on a historical artifact and it turns into this
>>969416
Nothing you have did not come from God, including the food in your gut and the air in your lungs.
>>969443
Get out heretic.
>>969456
>This thread is cancer
>>969451
being this angry is bad for your health
let Jesus into your heart
>>969454
>
>>969459
Exactly, God didn't do anything for me so why should I care if there's something out there.
I shouldn't, end of story, I don't know why these Christcucks think its okay to talk about a historical artifact and then turn it into some religious discussion.
Pls purge this thread, mods. This is literally Autism Thirty.
>>969461
Faith does not reinforcement from a sheet of old cloth.
You either believe or you don't. God doesn't need to leave little clues scattered around to wink at us. If your faith requires some kind of reinforcement from a false idol it wasn't that true to begin with
>>969442
>''A Clean Cloth'', What Greek Word Usage Tells Us about the Burial Wrappings of Jesus, Diana Fulbright, Director of Research, Shroud of Turin Center
>https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n62part7.pdf
Read it. Unconvincing. Does not speak to John's account of a completely separate head covering.
And the napkin, which had been on his head, not lying with the linen cloths,
but rolled up in a place by itself.
(John 20:7)
>>969479
They're literal cancer.
>>969443
Bruh, is you're most sophisticated information about Catholicism Chick-Tracts or something? This is some embarrassingly outdated bigotry.
>>969479
Known Heretic v Born Again Christian
That you choose poorly in your own post indicts you.
>>969485
>Read it
>>969480
He gave you life. He gave you a body. He gave you food, shelter, and clothing. He gave you everything you have.
Maybe say "thanks".
>>969502
You may want to look into the history of your rosary.
Why is this thread devolving into another sequel to "God's Not Dead"?
>>969504
Yes, and quoted from it.
>>969514
He is surely alive!
>>969507
That was pure chance, faggot. God didn't do that for me.
>>969514
Cause someone is losing the argument. So they derail the thread, attempt to divide Christians between each other, just to ignore the truth.
>>969514
Because Americans. Together with the Saudis, they're the autists of self-reflection and contemplation and can't handle anything that is ambiguous and not stated in advance as a literal report
>>969524
Pure chance.
I guess you don't understand how complex you are.
>>969551
Buckle up, fellas! We're taking this thread into evolution denial!
>>969551
We're all very complex beings, I understand that, but chance has NOTHING to do with God.
Zero.
Zip.
Empty.
>>969337
>Jesus looks like the Jesus from the Letter of Lentulus, a known forgery, therefore the Shroud is true
You look stupid right now.
Stop arguing with this fool.
Focus on the shroud.
>>969569
Please.
http://storage.cloversites.com/fcfgroups/documents/Why%20We%20Believe%207.pdf
>>969359
It got carbon dated to the Middle Ages.
1:01:36 - 1:25:29
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNJPJ4JwHeE
>inb4 ''ur proof is le history channel? xD'' while ignoring everything I've posted
This is just to get a quick and clear explanation on it and the men in the video aren't nobodies.
Turin Shroud is a fake.
The first appearance of it in the historical record is in a letter written by a bishop, stating that the thing was created by a local alchemist/con-man.
The image on the shroud could have been created with methods known in Medieval Europe, and it is very likely its "3D nature" (which Christcucks think is very significant, for some reason) is due to having been formed with help of a bas-relief.
A number of researchers have replicated the Shroud using medieval methods, and the results are convincing. The 1988 carbon dating is accurate, I don't know why Christcucks deny it.
Also, the history supports that Southern France and Constantinople were veritable 'relic factories', and that a 'relic craze' swept Europe when even obviously fake relics were being used to bring prestige to a town.
It's a fake.
>>969589
Thankyou, now let's ignore the Christcucks before they become unruly.
>>969585
The 1988 Carbon-14 tests done at Oxford, Zurich and Arizona Labs used pieces of the same sample cut from a corner (>>969301 >>969309)
1. A paper published in Jan 20, 2005 in the journal Thermochimica Acta by Dr. Ray Rogers, retired Fellow with the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory and lead chemist with the original STURP science team (the 1978 Shroud of Turin Research Project, involving approximately 35 scientists directly examining the Shroud for five days), has shown conclusively that the sample cut from The Shroud of Turin in 1988 was taken from an area of the cloth that was re-woven during the middle ages. Here are some excerpts:
"Pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry results from the sample area, coupled with microscopic and microchemical observations, prove that the radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of Turin. The radiocarbon date was thus not valid for determining the true age of the shroud."
"As part of the Shroud of Turin research project (STURP), I took 32 adhesive-tape samples from all areas of the shroud and associated textiles
in 1978." "It enabled direct chemical testing on recovered linen fibers and particulates".
"If the shroud had been produced between 1260 and 1390 AD, as indicated by the radiocarbon analyses, lignin should be easy to detect. A linen produced in 1260 AD would have retained about 37% of its vanillin in 1978...The Holland cloth, and all other medieval linens, gave the test [i.e. tested positive] for vanillin wherever lignin could be observed on growth nodes. The disappearance of all traces of vanillin from the lignin in the shroud indicates a much older age than the radiocarbon laboratories reported."
(1/2)
>>969514
The cover of that movie looks like a horror movie
>Nowhere to run
>Nowhere to hide
>This Sunday, lock your doors
>GODS NOT DEAD
>>969625
Let's just destroy the whole shit then and find out for sure.
>>969585
>>969625
"The fire of 1532 could not have greatly affected the vanillin content of lignin in all parts of the shroud equally. The thermal conductivity of linen is very low... therefore, the unscorched parts of the folded cloth could not have become very hot." "The cloth's center would not have heated at all in the time available. The rapid change in color from black to white at the margins of the scorches illustrates this fact." "Different amounts of vanillin would have been lost in different areas. No samples from any location on the shroud gave the vanillin test [i.e. tested positive]." "The lignin on shroud samples and on samples from the Dead Sea scrolls does not give the test [i.e. tests negative]."
"Because the shroud and other very old linens do not give the vanillin test [i.e. test negative], the cloth must be quite old." "A determination of the kinetics of vanillin loss suggests that the shroud is between 1300- and 3000- years old. Even allowing for errors in the measurements and assumptions about storage conditions, the cloth is unlikely to be as young as 840 years."
"A gum/dye/mordant [(for affixing dye)] coating is easy to observe on...radiocarbon [sample] yarns. No other part of the shroud shows such a
coating." "The radiocarbon sample had been dyed. Dyeing was probably done intentionally on pristine replacement material to match the color of the older, sepia-colored cloth." "The dye found on the radiocarbon sample was not used in Europe before about 1291 AD and was not common until more than 100 years later."
"Specifically, the color and distribution of the coating implies that repairs were made at an unknown time with foreign linen dyed to match the older original material." "The consequence of this conclusion is that the radiocarbon sample was not representative of the original cloth."
(2/3*)
come on guys, 300BC to 400 AD is a really wide margin to be able to say that it's authentic. we already know that it wasn't until the time of Constantine that people were obsessing over and claiming to have relics
>>969337
So for it to have been a forgery, something like 3-d printers would have been needed?
>>969585
>>969625
>>969643
"The combined evidence from chemical kinetics, analytical chemistry, cotton content, and pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry proves that the material from the radiocarbon area of the shroud is significantly different from that of the main cloth. The radiocarbon sample was thus not part of the original cloth and is invalid for determining the age of the shroud."
"A significant amount of charred cellulose was removed during a restoration of the shroud in 2002." "A new radiocarbon analysis should be done on the charred material retained from the 2002 restoration."
Raymond N. Rogers. 20 January 2005. Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of turin. Thermochimica Acta, Vol. 425, Issue 1-2, Pages 189-194.
2. The Fire-Model Tests of Dr. Dmitri Kouznetsov in 1994 and Drs. John Jackson and Propp in 1998, which replicated the famous Fire of 1532,
demonstrated that the fire added carbon isotopes to the linen.
Dmitri Kouznetsov, Andrey Ivanov, Pavel Veletsky. 5 January 1996. Effects of fires and biofractionation of carbon isotopes on results of radiocarbon dating of old textiles: the Shroud of Turin. Journal of Archaeological Science, Volume 23, Issue 1, Pages 109-121. doi:10.1006/jasc.1996.0009
Jackson, John P. and Propp, Keith. 1997. On the evidence that the radiocarbon date of the Turin Shroud was significantly affected by the 1532 fire. Actes du III Symposium Scientifique International du CIELT, Nice, France.
http://www.newgeology.us/Shroud.pdf
(3/3)
>>969463
le epic meme xD upvoted
>>969558
You're still fooled by a 19th century theologian.
>>969564
Design infers designer.
New experiments date the Shroud of Turin to the 1st century AD. They comprise three tests; two chemical and one mechanical. The chemical tests were done with Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) and Raman spectroscopy, examining the relationship between age and a spectral
property of ancient flax textiles. The mechanical test measured several micro-mechanical characteristics of flax fibers, such as tensile strength.
The results were compared to similar tests on samples of cloth from between 3250 BC and 2000 AD whose dates are accurately known. FTIR identifies chemical bonds in a molecule by producing an infrared absorption spectrum. The spectra produce a profile of the sample, a distinctive molecular fingerprint that can be used to identify its components. Raman Spectroscopy uses the light scattered off of a sample as opposed to the light absorbed by a sample. It is a very sensitive method of identifying specific chemicals.
The tests on fibers from the Shroud of Turin produced the following dates:
FTIR = 300 BC ± 400 years; Raman spectroscopy = 200 BC ± 500 years; and multi-parametric mechanical = 400 AD ± 400 years. All the dates have a 95% certainty.
The average of all three dates is 33 BC ± 250 years (the collective uncertainty is less than the individual test uncertainties). The average date is compatible with the historic date of Jesus’ death on the cross in 30 AD, and is far older than the medieval dates obtained with the flawed Carbon-14 sample in 1988. The range of uncertainty for each test is high because the number of sample cloths used for comparison was low; 8 for FTIR, 11 for Raman, and 12 for the mechanical test.
The scientists note that “future calibrations based on a greater number of samples and coupled with ad hoc cleaning procedures could significantly improve its accuracy, though it is not easy to find ancient samples adequate for the test.”
(1/2)
>>969666
What design?
>>969677
They used tiny fibers extracted from the Shroud by micro-analyst Giovanni Riggi di Numana, who gave them to Fanti. Riggi passed away in 2008, but he had been involved in the intensive scientific examination of the Shroud of Turin by the STURP group in 1978, and on April 21, 1988 was the man who cut from the Shroud the thin 7 x 1 cm sliver of linen that was used for carbon dating.
These tests were carried out in University of Padua laboratories by professors from various Italian universities, led by Giulio Fanti, Italian professor of mechanical and thermal measurement at the University of Padua’s engineering faculty. He co-authored reports of the findings in 1) a paper in the journal Vibrational Spectroscopy, July 2013, “Non-destructive dating of ancient flax textiles by means of vibrational spectroscopy” by Giulio Fanti, Pietro Baraldi, Roberto Basso, and Anna Tinti, Volume 67, pages 61-70; 2) a paper titled “A new cyclic-loads machine for the measurement of micro-mechanical properties of single flax fibers coming from the Turin Shroud” by Giulio Fanti and Pierandrea Malfi for the XXI AIMETA (Italian Association of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics) congress in 2013, and 3) the 2013 book “Il Mistero della Sindone” (The Mystery of the Shroud), written by Giulio Fanti and Saverio Gaeta in Italian.
(2/2)
http://www.newgeology.us/Shroud.pdf
>>969678
Start with DNA. And then go to the cellular factories that produce proteins.
>>969690
How does that infer design?
>>969683
>newgeology
I thought those guys don't like contemporary dating methods?
I don't believe its actually Jesus, i mean its dated to the middle ages, but it is really fucking cool.
>>969690
This
>>969653
Not even. They don't actually replicate the shroud in the documentary, as in put an image onto fabric, but they manage to infer a 3-d image and then scan it back to a 2-d image. Hypothetically, the process of creating the shroud would have meant for light to be processed in a way similar to a scanner (what they call 'slices of light over time').
>>969295
>http://www.shroud.it/ROGERS-3.pdf
Not Found
The requested URL /ROGERS-3.pdf was not found on this server.
>>969589
>A number of researchers have replicated the Shroud using medieval methods, and the results are convincing
????
Also, reminder that:
>>969309
>The Shroud of Turin’s images are superficial and fully contained within a thin layer of starch fractions and saccharides that coats the outermost fibers of the Shroud. The color is a caramel-like substance, probably the product of an amino/carbonyl reaction. Where there is no image, the carbohydrate coating is clear. There is also a very faint image of the face on the reverse side of the Shroud of Turin which lines up with the image on the front of the cloth. There is no image content between the two superficial image layers indicating that nothing soaked through to form the image on the other side.
>The Turin Shroud was examined with visible and ultraviolet spectrometry, infrared spectrometry, x-ray fluorescence spectrometry, thermography, pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry, lasermicroprobe Raman analyses, and microchemical testing. No evidence for pigments (paint, dye or stains) or artist’s media was found anywhere on the Shroud of Turin.
>>969711
400AD isnt Jebus
>>969694
How does the most complicated code ever found infer design.....
>>969720
Try this:
http://www.shroud.it/ROGERS-3.PDF
>>969706
They didn't even source their findings. Chances are the citation article doesn't have sources either.
>>969725
The only conclusion I can draw from all of this "evidence" is that a highly skilled artisan and con man intended this shroud to resemble Jesus.
And the only part he messed up on was unrolling the rolled up body covering, and connecting the head handkerchief to the body covering.
It's a pretty good forgery. Maybe an excellent forgery.
But it ain't Jesus' shroud.
>>969729
How does it? Go ahead, in detail, explain it.
>>969744
Does the coding of a computer program infer a computer programmer?
>>969747
Not the same thing and you know it. Again, in detail, explain. Cite your sources, and post it to get peer reviewed.
>>969744
One gram of DNA can hold up to 455 exabytes (one exabyte equals 1018 bytes). In comparison, a CD-ROM holds about 700 million (7 x 108) bytes of data. (One gram of DNA holds the equivalent amount of data as 600 billion CD-ROMs. Assuming a typical book requires 1 megabyte of data-storage capacity, then one gram of DNA could harbor 455 trillion books.
Detailed enough?
>>969753
Does the coding.
Of a computer program.
Infer.
A computer programmer?
>>969756
It's sad that your faith in Jesus relies on this fraud.
Do you honestly think any Christian would have unwound the body wrappings of Jesus?
Do you honestly think that John was wrong in describing the head piece as different, and separate, from the body piece?
No, your faith is in what you see, which means it is not faith at all, but sight.
>>969770
http://www.reasons.org/articles/harvard-scientists-write-the-book-on-intelligent-design-in-dna
Why? You'll never accept them, because you don't want to.
>>969743
>>969756
The image on the Shroud is of a man 5 feet 10 ½ inches tall, about 175 pounds, covered with scourge wounds and blood stains. Numerous surgeons and pathologists (including Dr. Frederick Zugibe (Medical Examiner - Rockland, New York), Dr. Robert Bucklin (Medical Examiner - Las Vegas, Nevada), Dr. Herman Moedder (Germany), the late Dr. Pierre Barbet (France), and Dr. David Willis (England)) have studied the match between the Words, Weapons and Wounds, and agree that the words of the New Testament regarding the Passion clearly match the wounds depicted on the Shroud, and that these wounds are consistent with the weapons used by ancient Roman soldiers in Crucifixion.
Specifically, the scourge marks on the shoulders, back, and legs of the Man of the Shroud match the flagrum (Roman whip) which has three leather thongs, each having two lead or bone pellets (plumbatae) on the end. The lance wound in the right side matches the Roman Hasta (4cm x 1 cm spear wound). Iron nails (7" spikes) were used in the wrist area (versus the palms as commonly depicted in Medieval art). These marks, combined with the capping of thorns which is not found anywhere else in crucifixion literature of ancient Roman (Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Elder or Pliny the Younger) or Jewish (Flavius Joesphus, Philo of Alexandria) historians create a unique signature of the historical Jesus of Nazareth.
http://www.newgeology.us/Shroud.pdf
>>969316
>>969318
>>969321
>>969327
>>969332
>>969333
>>969770
Does a painting infer a painter?
Does a building infer a builder?
Does a shitpost infer a shitposter?
>>969773
>create a unique signature of the historical Jesus of Nazareth.
Indeed. As intended. It's fake.
I'm confused. Even if someone were to grant that the shroud is of Jesus, how does that prove Christianity?
>>969785
Nice reading comprehension.
>>969772
>Where Faith and Science converge
My sides. That's why they never post this shit to get peer reviewed.
>>969788
I think the theory is that the image was made by the energy expended at the resurrection.
I also think the shroud is bogus.
>>969778
We're not paints or buildings. Paints and buildings don't adapt on their own, that infers evolution.
>>969789
The con artist did create a unique signature of the historical Jesus of Nazareth.
So much so that you fell for it.
>>969795
Peer review does not allow for any design papers. It's tyrannical in its godless beliefs.
>>969807
We also apparently are not equally able to answer simple questions.
>>969816
MY SIDES. Muh conspiracy.
>>969819
Those are loaded questions.
>>969824
It's a fairly well known fact. Maybe re-read the Climategate emails....assuming you read them once.
>>969832
>Climategate
>Creatorgate
Post them, go ahead, I'll read them.
>>969825
They couldn't be simpler. You to go a museum, you see a painting, you start looking for the painter's name on the bottom.
God's an artist, and He works in free will moral agents.
>>969838
"God's an artist"
How?
>>969301 >>969309 >>969625 >>969643 >>969654 >>969677 >>969683
But hopes were soon dashed in 1988 when the cloth was carbon dated by three laboratories in Zurich, Oxford and Arizona. They came back with a date range of 1260 to 1390 declaring the cloth only 600-700 years old. So much for the Shroud being authentic. The New York Times announced that the Shroud was a fake, end of story.
But the story has a plot that few know about and is starting to make the news. But lets go back to 1988 first. The three dating labs, according to a scientific protocol agreed upon in 1985, were supposed to cut several samples of the Shroud from different locations. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. Instead, the scientific adviser to the Arch Diocese of Turin, Luigi Gonnella, decided to violate the protocol and allowed only one sample to be cut from an outside corner where it had been handled hundreds of times over the centuries as it was held up for public viewing.
One would think that a sample is a sample and why would it make any difference? That is like saying DNA is DNA, but not if you have the wrong DNA. How could it be a bad sample? The Shroud was in a fire in 1532 that nearly destroyed the cloth. Eight gaping holes were patched up and the entire cloth was attached to a backing cloth for support. This occurred in 1534 at a time when weaving had become an art and professional weavers were called upon to do “invisible mending” on fine tapestries restoring them to their original condition.
(1/2)
>>969301 >>969309 >>969625 >>969643 >>969654 >>969677 >>969683
>>969865
Now for what’s making the news. The violation of the sampling protocol in 1988 appears to have been a colossal mistake. Recent micro-chemical tests performed on thread samples from the area cut for carbon dating have been compared with threads taken from the main body of the Shroud and low and behold they are not the same! It appears that Gonella and the carbon labs were fooled by the handiwork of highly skilled French re-weavers according to museum textile experts.
Another violation of the protocol now seems more important too. The labs were supposed to do micro-chemical tests on the sample to make sure it was representative of the entire cloth. Guess what, they didn’t do that either. It seems like they just looked at it and said, “Yep, sure looks like the Shroud to me. Let’s cut it and get out of here.”
(2/2)
More: http://shroud2000.com/CarbonDatingNews.html
>>969868
More conspiracy theories.
>>969868
Like I said, let's just destroy the whole shit and prove once and for all if it is or isn't from the middle ages.
>>969806
>bogus
I don't think you understand the meaning of that word.
Read these two pdf documents:
Summary of scientific and historical evidence supporting the authenticity of the Shroud:
http://www.newgeology.us/Shroud.pdf
Raymond N. Rogers' observations and conclusions:
http://shroudnm.com/docs/2013-01-10-Yannick-Cl%C3%A9ment-Reflections-on-Ray-Rogers-Shroud-Work.pdf
And visit (to read) this page:
The Authentication of the Turin Shroud: An Issue in Archaeological Epistemology by William Meacham - Archaeologist CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY - Vol. 24 - N° 3 - (June 1983) Published by the University of Chicago Press
https://www.shroud.com/meacham2.htm
>>969900
No, they haven't. That's all just speculation.
>>969912
Let's just burn the whole shit and get it over with, I'm tired of the arguing.
>>969900
They have but it doesnt mean it is actually jesus
>>969920
Some believers in the authenticity of the shroud have attempted to discount the radiocarbon dating result by claiming that the sample may represent a medieval "invisible" repair fragment rather than the image-bearing cloth.[13][14][85][86][87][88][89] It has been suggested, for example, that burnt residue,[7][8] or other types of residues,[90][91] might have skewed the radiocarbon date toward the present. These various challenges have all been refuted by experts based on scientific analysis of shroud evidence.[10][12][13][14][15][92][93] According to professor Christopher Ramsey of the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit in 2011: "There are various hypotheses as to why the dates might not be correct, but none of them stack up."[17]
>>969946
>Some believers in the authenticity of the shroud have attempted to discount the radiocarbon dating result by claiming that the sample may represent a medieval "invisible" repair fragment rather than the image-bearing cloth
Correct.
>>969301 >>969309 >>969625 >>969643 >>969654 >>969677 >>969683
>It has been suggested, for example, that burnt residue,[7][8] or other types of residues,[90][91] might have skewed the radiocarbon date toward the present.
>It has been suggested
Not by me, so what's your point?
>>969838
>>969666
>>969690
>>969698
>>969729
>>969747
This is a ridiculous argument. The whole thesis is built on comparing genetics and phenomenon of biology to paintings, programming, and other artifacts.
It assumes that humans were built by God in an evening or even over the course of a year when in fact the genetic code you've brought up went through countless iterations for hundreds of millions of years.
Humanity is not an art project and if we were designed it was by a god who was very dedicated to rigorous trial and error.
>>969946
>>969959
It's funny that you used Wiki because the ''Studies'' section on the Wikipedia article of the Sudarium only states:
>The cloth has been dated to around 700 AD by radiocarbon dating.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudarium_of_Oviedo#Studies
But if you look at the source (pdf below) provided in the ''Notes'' which is supposed to support that statement, you'll read:
>The sample from the Sudarium was dated to around 700 AD. Scientist César Barta spoke about the carbon dating process, emphasising the fact that if carbon dating is always absolutely accurate, then we could just as well finish the congress there and then. However, there were several points to bear in mind – in specialist carbon dating magazines, about half the samples dated come up with the expected date, around 30% with an “acceptable” date, and the other 20% is not what one would expect from archaeology.
>The laboratory used (via the National Museum in Madrid) said they were surprised by the result and asked if the cloth was contaminated with any oil based product, as oil is not cleaned by the laboratory processes used before carbon dating and if oil is present on a sample, the date produced by carbon dating is in fact the date of contamination. Finally, the history of the Sudarium is very well established and there are definite references to its presence in Jerusalem in AD 570 and at the beginning of the fifth century.
>As has already been mentioned, there are definite references to the Sudarium’s presence in Jerusalem in the 5th and 6th centuries, two hundred years before the carbon 14 date.
http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n65part6.pdf
Gee! I wonder why the person who wrote the wiki article didn't include that additional information!
>>969965
wow fucking sneaky atheists
>>969965
Like I said, let's just burn the whole shit and get it over with.
>>969846
In every possible way.
>>969960
>went through countless iterations for hundreds of millions of years
I'm not even the OP or the guy who brought this up, but you're talking nonsense, man.There was an initial cell, and the pattern of DNA hasn't changed since then.
>>969839
Yeah, it was. Get over it.
>>>/x/
Shroud isnt real you faggot roleplayer. If you were a real christian you wouldnt be on this site
WHERE the FUCK are the mods???
>>969976
Yes, indeed. Read this btw:
In the Cathedral of Oviedo in northern Spain is a linen cloth called the Sudarium Christi, or the Face Cloth of Christ. It is often referred to as the Cloth of Oviedo. The Sudarium Christi is a poor-quality linen cloth, like a handkerchief, measuring 33 by 21 inches. Unlike the Shroud of Turin, it does not have an image. However, it does have bloodstains and serum stains from pulmonary edema fluid which match the blood and serum patterns and blood type (AB) of the Shroud of Turin.
The Sudarium Christi has a well-documented history. One source traces the cloth back as far as 570 AD. Pelayo, Bishop of Oviedo in the 1100's, noted in his Chronicles that the Oviedo Cloth left Jerusalem in 614 AD in response to an attack led by Persian King Chosroes II, and made its way across North Africa to Spain. It was transported to Oviedo in a silver ark (large box) along with many other sacred relics. The Sudarium was never in contact with the Shroud since its arrival in Spain around 711 AD.
The Oviedo Cloth was placed around the head at the time of death on the Cross and remained there until the body was to be covered by the Shroud in the Garden Tomb. Then it was removed and placed to one side (John 20:7). Oviedo scholar Mark Guscin notes that the practice of covering the face is referenced in the Talmud (Moed Katan 27a). He adds that Rabbi Alfred Kolatch of New York talks of the Kevod Ha-Met or "respect for the dead" as the reason for covering the head. Rabbi Michael Tuktzinsky of Jerusalem in his Sefer Gesher Cha'yim (Volume 1, Chapter 3, 1911) offers as a reason that it is a hardship for onlookers to gaze on the face of a dead person.
(1/2)
>>969991
That's not an explanation.
>>969897
Dude, I remember this from '88, k? I'm a bible thumping born again young earth creationist hopelessly in love with Christ Jesus.
It's a fake.
>>969976
>>969998
According to Guscin, studies by members of the Spanish Centre for Sindonology (Dr. Jose Villalain, Jaime Izquierdo and Guillermo Heras of the University of Valencia) using infrared and ultraviolet photography and electron microscopy have demonstrated that this Cloth and the Shroud of Turin touched the same face, although at different points in the burial
process. They note that the length of the nose on both cloths is 8 centimeters (3 inches). Tradition and historical information support the idea that the face touched by both cloths was that of the historical Jesus of Nazareth.
Those interested in the work of Oviedo scholar Mark Guscin can read about it in his book The Oviedo Cloth, 1998, The Luttenworth Press, Cambridge, CT. ISBN 07188-2985-9.
http://www.newgeology.us/Shroud.pdf
(2/2)
>>969996
cringe
>>969946
Bioplastic coverings do.....
>>969960
>the genetic code you've brought up went through countless iterations for hundreds of millions of years.
Proof?
>>970001
>I'm a bible thumping born again young earth creationist hopelessly in love with Christ Jesus.
So you're a proddy heretic? Get back in the trash can.
>It's a fake.
What's fake? Examine the evidence pal, experts on the Shroud disagree.
Summary of scientific and historical evidence supporting the authenticity of the Shroud:
http://www.newgeology.us/Shroud.pdf
Raymond N. Rogers' observations and conclusions:
http://shroudnm.com/docs/2013-01-10-Yannick-Cl%C3%A9ment-Reflections-on-Ray-Rogers-Shroud-Work.pdf
Here's some secular peer-reviewed scientific journal articles on the Shroud of Turin:
http://shroud.typepad.com/topics/2005/10/secular_peerrev.html
>>969998
At least this does not directly conflict with the bible.
>>970000
What a waste of a get.
>>970026
The Holy Shroud is supported by the Bible.
>>970022
>http://www.newgeology.us/Shroud.pdf
fake
>Raymond N. Rogers' observations and conclusions:
fake
>http://shroudnm.com/docs/2013-01-10-Yannick-Cl%C3%A9ment-Reflections-on-Ray-Rogers-Shroud-Work.pdf
fake
>Here's some secular peer-reviewed scientific journal articles on the Shroud of Turin:
fake
>http://shroud.typepad.com/topics/2005/10/secular_peerrev.html
fake
>>970032
Not him, but where in the Bible?
>>969293
>>970029
Get off my dick, son.
>>969996
Babby can't handle facts I see. Put your big boy pants on and examine the evidence instead of sperging out.
>>970032
Nope.
John 20
And he, stooping down and looking in, saw the linen cloths lying there; yet he did not go in. 6 Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb; and he saw the linen cloths lying there, and the handkerchief that had been around His head, not lying with the linen cloths, but folded together in a place by itself.
>>970022
papist scum
>>970034
>IT'S FAKE CUZ I SAY SO, OKAY?? :'(
Get lost kid.
>>970034
You're either OP trying to make yourself seem smarter in comparison, or you're a literal autistic atheist that is making OP look smarter in comparison.
>>970041
WHAT FACTS, nigga? WHAT FACTS?
>>970044
>papist scum
Heretic scum. Have fun in purgatory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popes#1st_century
>>970045
>>IT'S FAKE CUZ I SAY SO, OKAY??
Funny because that's how Christians are with the Shroud of Turin dating.
Why has there been no reconstruction of Jesus's face based on the shroud yet?
>>970053
>tu quoque
Got any actual arguments?
>>970053
There's so much evidence which supports its authenticity yet you're ignoring all of it. Who's in denial?
>>970045
It's fake because it contradicts the bible.
>>970047
Or you're an idiot.
>>970059
WHAT evidence? Nigga, everything you posted was speculation. Just because it's presented with pretty pictures doesn't make it evidence.
>>970051
Have fun bypassing the mythical purgatory on your way to Hades, trial, and a lake of fire, pagan scum.
>>970056
See >>969337 made by Ray Downing from that video.
1:01:36 - 1:25:29
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNJPJ4JwHeE
That's literally the most accurate facial reconstruction of the Lord Jesus Christ ever made since the existence of Christianity.
>>970059
It contradicts the bible.
It's false.
>>970051
>implying Peter and Paul agreed on doctrine
>>970067
It literally is not.
>>970062
get out, proddie
>>970069
Implying Peter was smart enough to know what Paul was talking about.
Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless; and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.
>>970075
Classic catholic; would rather believe C14 dating and have a "holy relic" than believe in the bible.
>>970062
It does not.
>>970065
Read the pdf documents instead of playing dumb.
>>970066
>mythical purgatory
Heretic proddy confirmed.
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/Articles/the_bible_teaches_purgatory.pdf
I think that you won't even get in purgatory, you might get straight to Hell. Your soul seems rotten to me. Tell me, what do you think about the Blessed Virgin Mary?
>>970068
It doesn't, read the thread pal.
>>970075
There's no place for you here, papist. The cesspool that is the Vatican is being uncovered.
>>970084
>C14 dating
read the fucking thread you moron
>>970091
this
Shouldn't this thread be on /x/?
>>970087
Bible: Jesus' body was wrapped in cloths; those cloths maintained their shape, as Jesus resurrected right out of them.
Bible: Jesus' head was covered by a handkerchief, separately, that was folded, separately, from His body wrappings.
Fake Shroud: Jesus' head and body depicted on same continuous cloth.
>>970095
(you)
>>970091
Read it. It relies on C14 dating. I suggest you read it. It relies on C14 dating.
>>970087
where is the webm from?
>>970107
Probably some demonic rock concert where a fire ''accidentally :^)'' started.
>>970107
Some stage in Taiwan exploded into flames and some 100 people got severely burned
>>970087
You idiots read the bible like kangaroos read Mein Kampf.
>If any man's work abide which he hath built
thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he
shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.”
This has nothing to do with purgatory; it's the bema seat judgment. The one you'll never see, because your faith is in your church to save you.
>Pope Julius III, Council of Trent, on the Sacrament of Penance, Sess. 14, Chap. 8,
Nov. 25, 1551- “… it is absolutely false and contrary to the word of God that
the guilt [of a sin] is never forgiven by the Lord without the entire
punishment also being remitted.
Absolute heresy, as all sin (but one) was forgiven at the cross.
Your church is a joke. Your membership in it is a joke. Repent, and be saved.
>>970076
So Christians even hate Peter? Why am I not surprised...
>>970121
>I can fuck my kids, have hubristic pride, lynch blacks, call fags fags in the street all day and be a gluttonous fuck who eats at Mc Donalds every week but I'm still going to Heaven because I accepted Jeus Christ as my Lord and Savior :^) HOL UP I'm feeling the power of the Holy Spirit!....ashalakamo gashatola ma tasha kuma bonga shaka mala posha kala maka dragomisha remana kishomalikosho rokolashama!
Proddies everyone.
>All this christian nutbaggery
>>970154
>ashalakamo gashatola ma tasha kuma bonga shaka mala posha kala maka dragomisha remana kishomalikosho rokolashama
Oof, I'm not even Christian but I started laughing here.
>>970123
And again, your Origen is a known heretic.
>>970136
There's no hate in there. Peter was a fisherman. Paul was a scholar.
>>969293
The shroud may be real, "Jesus Christ" may have been an actual person, but none of that proves that god exists and that he was the "son" of god.
>in b4 muh bible is teh proof!!1
>>970154
>Murder 68,000,000 Christians and Jews
>Claim to be Jesus' church.
Papists, everyone.
>>970187
If you already know that the bible is proof, you should really stop mocking it, and start reading it.
>>970166
Christcucks ruined /his/.
>>970154
AJA BABO BUGU MUGA OOKI LUKU BONGO OOGA WUMI BABU SHAKA
WE WUZ KINGZ N SHIT
>>970197
There is no purgatory. There is no limbo. There is no place in heaven for Catholics. Repent, and be saved.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=226761
Just going to leave this thread here. To give you a summary; no, the radiocarbon dating has not been overturned.
>>970170
The damned laughing with the damned, and mocking the Holy Spirit. Not a surprise.
>>970215
he was mocking black people
>>970187
>>970197
nvm I read ''may not have been an actual person''.
>none of that proves that god exists
The Cosmos was created since it had a beginning (and is now expanding) and its creator is God by definition. As for Jesus, he was the Christ prophesized in scripture and the life he lead is evidence but if you want actual (physical) proof of his divinity, there is the Holy Shroud which he left for us.
>>970213
>internationalskeptics
>forums
That's about as valid a source as this thread.
>>970005
Top fucking kek, I have seen Catholics post this exact same shit on other forums before. It's like you idiots all use the same sources. I even had one guy try to convince me the Shroud has "nuclear imaging" and that there are "hundreds of peer reviewed papers" confirming its authenticity. Of course when asked about these the actual list turned out to be 10 and none of them particularly exciting
>The front image of the Turin Shroud, 1.95 m long, is not directly compatible with the back image, 2.02 m long.[148]
>>970221
>he was mocking black people
??? I was mocking pentecostal heretic proddies.
>>970213
>You cited this....to say the shroud is real?
Yes. The image on the shroud is an idealised, iconic image of Jesus that did not start to take shape until about 600AD, and didn't reach the form on the shroud until about 800AD. In addition, Tertullian and Josephus left physical descriptions of Jesus in their writings (as did some of the 'other' gospels). Those descriptions match each other quite well. They do not match the image on the shroud.
The crucifixion marks on the image are incorrect. The Romans may have varied their methods regarding the hands, but the feet were always dealt with in the same way, which is not the method shown on the shroud. The carbon dating was performed on 4 distinct samples from the shroud, and all 4 showed a date of between 1200 and 1390.
In short, although the Turin shroud is a fascinating object, it is not the burial shroud of Jesus. In fact, since crucifixion was abolished by Constantine, it is not a burial shroud at all. It is most likely a very unusual example of medieval iconography.
>>970231
>dat denial
Nuclear imaging:
http://shroud.com/pdfs/whanger.pdf
http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/accett2.pdf
>>970235
You were mocking the Holy Spirit of God.
>>970222
>People really believe this
>>970249
>people actually fall for this christcuck baiting
>>970177
Peter was a companion of Jesus.
>Paul was a scholar.
Of Judaism...a religion he committed heresy in by tossing aside the Law.
>>970251
>Thinking christians are smart enough to bait people
>>970246
Yeah, no. It's proddies who do so by being biblically illiterate.
>''And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?''
>''And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.''
Acts 2:4-11
>''If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.''
1 Corinthians 14:27-28
>''For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.''
1 Corinthians 14:33
>>970246
Fuck your holy spirit
Your God is a system invented by man to convince ignorant scrubs to wage war
The real god is the aggregate and arbitrator of all information contained within the universe and it guides probability to create a coherent continuum of information. I guarantee 100% that god loves you infinitely and hates you just as much you piggly sum bitch
>>970261
Paul had more face time with Jesus than Peter did, a fact I keep throwing in your face time and time and time again.
>>970240
>literal lies
Read the thread dumbshit.
>>970265
Thats because they are greasy neckbeards copypasting stuff to bait fedoras
>>970266
You are mocking Christians speaking in tongues, then you are proving that you are blaspheming the bible where Christians full of the Holly Spirit are speaking in tongues.
It's like you want to go to hell.
>>970270
>Paul had more face time with Jesus than Peter did
???
No he didn't. Paul had 0 "facetime", while Peter had quite a lot.
>a fact I keep throwing in your face time and time and time again.
Have we met...?
>>970268
He's not my God. He is God. You'll see Him with your own eyes, in your existence.
I guarantee 100% you will not enjoy the experience.
>>970273
Those are quotes from some idiot's site attempting to "prove" the shroud is real.
OP is your name Bob Smith?
Also, make an account on the International Skeptics forum if you want to debate this with skeptics who know what they are talking about. I get the feeling you won't though because you are just trying to poach a few easy converts
>>969295
>>969301
>>969309
I never thought the quality of /his/ discussion could go any lower
>>970275
I just showed you that the ''speaking in tongues'' nonsense = just speaking in actual languages you never learned such as greek, latin, aramaic, hebrew etc. and not babbling nonsense
I'm italian and in my CEI Bible it's translated to ''lingue'' which literally means languages.
>''If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.''
1 Corinthians 14:27-28
>''For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.''
1 Corinthians 14:33
Read the Bible.
>>970280
Paul had three years, uninterrupted, with the risen Christ Jesus. Peter wandered from blunder to blunder to mistake to denial, denial, denial, and still didn't understand the resurrection.
Peter wrote late in his life that Paul was right about everything.
>>970286
You mocked Christians, and you mocked the Holy Spirit of God.
May God have mercy on your soul, you pagan piece of shit.
>>970288
>Paul had three years, uninterrupted, with the risen Christ Jesus.
[Citation needed]
>Peter wrote late in his life that Paul was right about everything.
[Citation needed]
>>970232
>tfw no one fell for my shit-tier bait
>>970281
another example of how fundies are incapable of seeing things from another point of view and lack basic empathy
>>970299
Poor guy.
>>969454
faggot
>>970296
Galatians 1
But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace, to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went to Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.
Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and remained with him fifteen days.
2 Peter 3
Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless; and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.
>>970303
There is the truth.
There is what you believe.
The two rarely if ever overlap.
>>970281
Your skydaddy is not the real god you ignorant protestant twat. Any god that professes that all other gods are pretenders is a fake. God doesn't have fuck all to prove.
You don't know fucking anything about what religion actually is and where it came from. You are an indoctrinated, incalculably dim, ferociously dogmatic asshole with no semblance of wisdom, understanding or knowledge. You would wish hell on someone for not believing in your thoughtform. Let me give you a little hint. Heaven and Hell don't actually exist and time works in terms of lego rather than a stopwatch or story. You. Know. NOTHING.
>>970305
Catholic.
>>969487
Don't talk shit about God's Not Dead 2
Christians are losing ground everyday in this country. Soon public school teachers will have their tax-payer provided salaries revoked, just for evangelizing in the classroom.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sxz-Y-c2UUc
