Catholic Heresy (for the record)

[mikeuk]

More of the same

Valiant. I am out of here, I refuse further argument with intellectually dishonest people.

If you knew anything of the shroud, you would know the RC date was the outlier, the rest of the science points much earlier which is not my opinion, as you stated, but scientific fact.

You criticise the lack of independent experts when that is what they did. Provable history placed the date before the RC date, so it could never have been right. Just like these stupid theories that said " da Vinci " did it, when the record shows it predates his birth! He was good but not that good!

The behaviour of hall, is the same as Dawkins. When it comes to religious things, they lose all their objectivity completely.
And since you prefer insults to objectivity ,or truth, I am done

 

[valiant]

Easily done, but answer the question on the shroud first, sinc it came before, it illustrates your attitude to a tee.
You condemn both the shroud science and those who did it knowing nothing about either. Go check it out and prove you were wrong.

After much toing and froing, the shroud was finally carbon dated in 1988 under the supervision of the British Museum. Laboratories in Oxford, Tucson, and Zurich were each sent a 40-gram section the size of a postage stamp, along with three control samples. The laboratories worked entirely independently of each other, and when the results were in, they all concurred, providing 95 per cent confidence in a date range of AD 1260–1390.

A worldwide conspiracy unearthed by MIKEUK? LOL

 

[Jackson123]

Good question. I think your heart can be right with God in spite of wrong teaching. If you love Jesus then yes you have the Holy Spirit.

I don't think we should pray to Mary. She was not God and we are told specifically to pray in Jesus name.

But most people don't know El Shaddai is the Old Testament name of God and shad means breast. So El Shaddai is the feminine name of God. El Shaddai was like a mother to the Israelites in the Wilderness. God did everything for them like a mother does for her little children.

This world likes to stereotype women as weak. But women have been risking dying in childbirth for thousands of years without complaint and sometimes they have a dozen children.

The red sentence is what I agree brother.

And if you have the Holy spirit, than holy spirit will teach you not to stay in Catholic system, that believe purgatory, Mary is co redemptrix etc.

 

[valiant]

Valiant. I am out of here, I refuse further argument with intellectually dishonest people.

If you knew anything of the shroud, you would know the RC date was the outlier, the rest of the science points much earlier which is not my opinion, as you stated, but scientific fact.

You criticise the lack of independent experts when that is what they did. Provable history placed the date before the RC date, so it could never have been right. Just like these stupid theories that said " da Vinci " did it, when the record shows it predates his birth! He was good but not that good!

The behaviour of hall, is the same as Dawkins. When it comes to religious things, they lose all their objectivity completely.
And since you prefer insults to objectivity ,or truth, I am done

goodbye I hope some day you will find the truth and become a good Protestant

By the way. Who called who a half-wit?

 

[Jeff_56]

goodbye I hope some day you will find the truth and become a good Protestant

not all protestants, not even all 'good' ones, are saved. so pray he calls on JESUS and JESUS ONLY and TRUSTS in JESUS and turns away from the heresy (repents of all sin).

TRUSTING JESUS is the key.

 

[Elin]

A Christian is a follower of Jesus and not required to believe in hell doctrine.

You can quote scripture all day long....the secrets are revealed in the ancient languages and in a detailed historical analysis.

Here is a start

Aion/ Aionios

AI

Too many closed minds in this thread.

I told you all to seek and as far as I can tell
not one of you did.

So I am done with this thread.

. . .You guys have succeeded in your close mindedness in making God look like a rapist that forces people into spiritual birth by upholding the hell doctrine. You have depicted Him as Molech.

I told you to check....and you were all too lazy to do it. Supremely confident in your intellectual pride.

May God have mercy on your hard hearted, stubborn souls.

Or it it, "Physician, heal thyself."

You scripture quoting ignoramus.

I told you to check the ancient language.

Hanson on aion/aionios.

I gave you all multiple links with the detailed analysis and you declined to examine them just like
the atheists declined to examine the evidence I brought them after they demanded that I provide evidence.

You are no better than an atheist....shame on you... a coward just like the atheist cowards I dialogued with for years.

First of all, you've got it backwards. . .

"You can quote the ancient languages all day long. . .the truth is revealed in the Scriptures."

Secondly, the Biblical doctrine of hell does not depend on aion's meaning in the "ancient languages."

Rather, the meaning of aion depends on its meaning in the NT, where that is shown in
the correlating Scriptures of

Mk 9:48 - when Jesus said "hell. . .where the fire is not quenched," and

Mat 3:12 - when John the Baptist said that Jesus would clear his threshing floor,

"burning up the chaff (wicked--Ps 1:4) with unquenchable fire (anger of God--2Kgs 22:13; Jer 7:20)"

So the meaning of "eternal" in the doctrine of hell is unending, everlasting.

The argument you present by the Tentmakers is a fail.

 

[mikeuk]

After much toing and froing, the shroud was finally carbon dated in 1988 under the supervision of the British Museum. Laboratories in Oxford, Tucson, and Zurich were each sent a 40-gram section the size of a postage stamp, along with three control samples. The laboratories worked entirely independently of each other, and when the results were in, they all concurred, providing 95 per cent confidence in a date range of AD 1260–1390.

A worldwide conspiracy unearthed by MIKEUK? LOL

They all used a then new and unproven technique called AMS, refused a cross check from Harwell a lab with far more experience and using the more established method, ignored the sampling protocol , failed to do textile tests, so came up with correlated errors. But it is their refusal to examine the other science that disagreed with them, and refusal to look at why they may have had erroneous results that proved their lack of proper process. They failed to accept the limitations of their own science which had already dated mummy wrappings older than the bodies contained, dated shellfish into the future, and required knowledge of diet to date bones accurately. Because their result agreed with their prejudice against Uvalidity they stopped. AND NOW HAVE BEEN PROVEN WRONG BECAUSE OF BAD SCIENCE!

But the sad thing is you do not care valiant, you argue to attempt to discredit your opponent, not to search for truth.

So you are not worth the effort. I am done.

 

[valiant]

After much toing and froing, the shroud was finally carbon dated in 1988 under the supervision of the British Museum. Laboratories in Oxford, Tucson, and Zurich were each sent a 40-gram section the size of a postage stamp, along with three control samples. The laboratories worked entirely independently of each other, and when the results were in, they all concurred, providing 95 per cent confidence in a date range of AD 1260–1390.

A worldwide conspiracy unearthed by MIKEUK? LOL

[FONT=Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif]Our first definite knowledge of the shroud is an event in around AD 1355, when it was put on show in the tiny French village of Lirey, in Champagne. Its owners were the local knight, Geoffrey de Charney, and his wife, Jeanne de Vergy.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif] Despite the insistence of the conspiracy brigade, there is no known connection between this Geoffrey de Charney (or his son of the same name) and the famous Knight Templar called Geoffrey de Charney, who was preceptor of Normandy and was burned alongside Grand Master Jacques de Molay as a relapsed heretic in 1314, three quarters of a century earlier.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif]At the time of the 1355 exhibition, Henry de Poitiers, bishop of Troyes, conducted an inquiry into the cloth, concluding that it was a ‘fraud’ which had been ‘cunningly painted, the truth being attested by the artist who had painted it, to wit, that it was a work of human skill and not miraculously wrought or bestowed’.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif]Nothing more is known of this episcopal enquiry, but in 1389 one of Henry’s direct successors, Bishop Peter d’Arcis, wrote to Antipope Clement VII in Avignon to tell him of Bishop Henry’s enquiry, and to complain that the linen was being displayed again. It seems that Peter did not succeed in getting the exhibition closed down, as Clement replied that he was happy for the cloth to be shown as ‘an image or representation’ of the true shroud.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif]After around 60 years of being moved about, in 1453 Geoffrey’s granddaughter, Margaret, finally passed the shroud to the ducal house of Savoy, who took it to their capital at Chambéry in the Alps.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif]Nothing much happened for almost 80 years, until disaster struck on the night of 4 December 1532, when a fire broke out in the chapel where it was kept behind the high altar in a silver casket housed in a niche sealed with a metal grille. The keyholder could not be found, so a blacksmith and two friars broke open the grille, but part of the casket had already liquefied, and drops of molten silver had fallen onto the shroud, burning holes straight through it, which a team of Poor Clare nuns then repaired with the patching that can still be seen.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif] The remaining history is uneventful. The linen was eventually moved to Turin, where it has stayed ever since. Then, on 18 March 1983, Umberto II of Savoy died, and in his will, quite unexpectedly, passed the shroud out of his family, gifting it to the pope and his successors.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif]These, broadly, are the known facts.[/FONT]

 

[valiant]

They all used a then new and unproven technique called AMS, refused a cross check from Harwell a lab with far more experience and using the more established method, ignored the sampling protocol , failed to do textile tests, so came up with correlated errors. But it is their refusal to examine the other science that disagreed with them, and refusal to look at why they may have had erroneous results that proved their lack of proper process. They failed to accept the limitations of their own science which had already dated mummy wrappings older than the bodies contained, dated shellfish into the future, and required knowledge of diet to date bones accurately. Because their result agreed with their prejudice against Uvalidity they stopped. AND NOW HAVE BEEN PROVEN WRONG BECAUSE OF BAD SCIENCE!

But the sad thing is you do not care valiant, you argue to attempt to discredit your opponent, not to search for truth.

So you are not worth the effort. I am done.

And why have further tests not been done at Harwell ? No lab would refuse such an important assignment. LOL bye!!!

 

[mikeuk]

Our first definite knowledge of the shroud is an event in around AD 1355, when it was put on show in the tiny French village of Lirey, in Champagne. Its owners were the local knight, Geoffrey de Charney, and his wife, Jeanne de Vergy.
Despite the insistence of the conspiracy brigade, there is no known connection between this Geoffrey de Charney (or his son of the same name) and the famous Knight Templar called Geoffrey de Charney, who was preceptor of Normandy and was burned alongside Grand Master Jacques de Molay as a relapsed heretic in 1314, three quarters of a century earlier.
At the time of the 1355 exhibition, Henry de Poitiers, bishop of Troyes, conducted an inquiry into the cloth, concluding that it was a ‘fraud’ which had been ‘cunningly painted, the truth being attested by the artist who had painted it, to wit, that it was a work of human skill and not miraculously wrought or bestowed’.
Nothing more is known of this episcopal enquiry, but in 1389 one of Henry’s direct successors, Bishop Peter d’Arcis, wrote to Antipope Clement VII in Avignon to tell him of Bishop Henry’s enquiry, and to complain that the linen was being displayed again. It seems that Peter did not succeed in getting the exhibition closed down, as Clement replied that he was happy for the cloth to be shown as ‘an image or representation’ of the true shroud.
After around 60 years of being moved about, in 1453 Geoffrey’s granddaughter, Margaret, finally passed the shroud to the ducal house of Savoy, who took it to their capital at Chambéry in the Alps.
Nothing much happened for almost 80 years, until disaster struck on the night of 4 December 1532, when a fire broke out in the chapel where it was kept behind the high altar in a silver casket housed in a niche sealed with a metal grille. The keyholder could not be found, so a blacksmith and two friars broke open the grille, but part of the casket had already liquefied, and drops of molten silver had fallen onto the shroud, burning holes straight through it, which a team of Poor Clare nuns then repaired with the patching that can still be seen.
The remaining history is uneventful. The linen was eventually moved to Turin, where it has stayed ever since. Then, on 18 March 1983, Umberto II of Savoy died, and in his will, quite unexpectedly, passed the shroud out of his family, gifting it to the pope and his successors.
These, broadly, are the known facts.

Disproven bullshit, but then you fall for it all valiant. You know nothing of science or research. You take one dissenting voice - a disenfranchised bishop who discovered his income had tried up with the trail of pilgrims to see the shroud, so a vested interest in discrediting it,
See what the real researchers say instead. It Is not a painting or work of art , so the artist did not exist.

 

[mikeuk]

And why have further tests not been done at Harwell ? No lab would refuse such an important assignment. LOL bye!!!

Because they were at loggerheads with Prof hall, over concerns over his baby AMS , so he kept them out of the old Boys club that got samples.
You know nothing of the history, so shut up on it!

 

[valiant]

Because they were at loggerheads with Prof hall, over concerns over his baby AMS , so he kept them out of the old Boys club that got samples.
You know nothing of the history, so shut up on it!

And the Roman Catholic church could not have given them samples? Come off it.

I thought you were leaving. Is this your ghost? you should have that carbon dated too LOL

 

[JesusIsAll]

And the Roman Catholic church could not have given them samples? Come off it.

I thought you were leaving. Is this your ghost? you should have that carbon dated too LOL

Back in the glory days of Catholicism, aka the Dark Ages, they probably had enough apostle bones, scattered around Europe, to build a Tyrannosaurus Rex.

 

[Jeff_56]

quote above: "Valiant. I am out of here,..." =>
(good. voluntary is best)

1 Corinthians 5:13 (KJ21)
13 But those who are outside, God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

1 Corinthians 5:13 (ASV) 13 But them that are without God judgeth. Put away the wicked man from among yourselves.

1 Corinthians 5:13 (AMP)
13 God alone sits in judgment on those who are outside. Drive out that wicked one from among you [expel him from your church].

1 Corinthians 5:13 (BRG) 13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

1 Corinthians 5:13 (CEB)
13 God will judge outsiders. Expel the evil one from among you!

1 Corinthians 5:13 (CJB) | In Context | Whole Chapter
13 God will judge those who are outside. Just expel the evildoer from among yourselves.

heresy is evil. heresy is wicked.

 

[MikeHenderson]

We True Christians Walk with God. We True Christians study the Word of God.

If I had only 5% of the Scriptures I would walk all over the World to receive the 95% of the Scriptures i was missing!

I would not just MAKE up anything i want and try to pass it off as being from God like the Catholics do.

When will you Catholics understand your not in charge anymore. Its not the Catholic Church anymore that rules the True Christians in the World.

God has taken away from you the Bible and the Authority and has given them to the True Christians in the World. The Catholic Church has lost the battle, God won, not you Catholics. Its God who you Catholics are fighting. Your not fighting me, you are actually fighting against the Holy Spirit. God has allowed the Catholics to be blinded by Satan to accept the lies of the World as Truths.

The Truth from God is the Scriptures. God removed the Bible from the Catholic Church and had His True Church spread His Gospel of Salvation all over the World that the Catholics refused to do. This is why God put down the Catholic Church and passed on the task to His True Church.

Its God who has All the Truth because God is Omniscient. He has all the Truth. There is no Truth outside of God and His book the Bible.

 

[valiant]

Because they were at loggerheads with Prof hall, over concerns over his baby AMS , so he kept them out of the old Boys club that got samples.
You know nothing of the history, so shut up on it!

Did he also forge the Gospel of John which says that Jesus was bound in strips of cloth with a separate cloth for the head, and not a shroud at all?

 

[mikeuk]

Did he also forge the Gospel of John which says that Jesus was bound in strips of cloth with a separate cloth for the head, and not a shroud at all?

And if you knew anything about the shroud or Jewish burial custom, you would know why what is written is entirely consistent with the cloths. But you don't.

You don't research. You don't read. You don't listen, you just argue , trying to make a virtue out of complete pig ignorance. So now research it and you can tell us the indisputable reason why your observation on scripture was wrong. It will be good for you to research and learn something, even better to admit your own fallibility.. Whilst you are there discover the series of scientific tests that date the cloth to first century holy land. I am through trying to teach those who refuse to learn about something before criticise it.

 

[valiant]

And if you knew anything about the shroud or Jewish burial custom, you would know why what is written is entirely consistent with the cloths. But you don't.

You don't research. You don't read. You don't listen, you just argue , trying to make a virtue out of complete pig ignorance. So now research it and you can tell us the indisputable reason why your observation on scripture was wrong. It will be good for you to research and learn something, even better to admit your own fallibility.. Whilst you are there discover the series of scientific tests that date the cloth to first century holy land. I am through trying to teach those who refuse to learn about something before criticise it.

LOL LOL I go -- I come back we all hoped you were going.

That series of tests were fake by a biased chemist. And it didn't date them accurately at all

I fail to see how strips of cloth and a head band by itself could constitute a shroud like the shroud of Turin. Did Jesus take the shroud with Him and hand it back later?

 

[mikeuk]

LOL LOL I go -- I come back we all hoped you were going.

That series of tests were fake by a biased chemist. And it didn't date them accurately at all

I fail to see how strips of cloth and a head band by itself could constitute a shroud like the shroud of Turin. Did Jesus take the shroud with Him and hand it back later?

They were not chemical tests, you discount them before even know what they are!
Read the history of the shroud, discover why you are wrong on the strip issue.

 

[valiant]

They were not chemical tests, you discount them before even know what they are!
Read the history of the shroud, discover why you are wrong on the strip issue.

I was reading about the shroud before you were born. And I have followed the story ever since. As usual you come up with no facts, only bald declarations. You are humbug.