I believe you are very mistaken about the nature and purpose of treasures in heaven.

They are not transferable, nor should they be confused with currency for transactions.

It is more the case, I suggest, of becoming who we are capable of becoming,

Consider the blessing of a good marriage, for example.

A good marriage depends on many things, including trust, fidelity, devotion and commitment. You have to be there for someone on their worst day, as well as their best. It's a lot of work, but there is absolutely nothing that could take the place of a good marriage.

If you have a good wife or husband, you have a treasure far beyond money or luxury. It's not an asset, it's an aspect of your life and a great source of happiness.

Consider also the person who works hard to develop his or her skill or ability. Whether it is the scholar who hones wisdom along with knowledge, the craftsman who creates a persona in their work, or someone simply known for good honest work, the reputation earned by your journey is priceless and without equal. There is a deep satisfaction in finding your place built through your skill and effort.

So too, there is treasure beyond price in having a name in the Lord's Household. It's not the kind of thing to be compared to a bank account or imagine that it earns our Salvation - that comes from Christ alone!

Yes, the Veil has the image of the risen Christ with eyes open. The image you dismiss as a drawing is what appears on a negative of the shroud.

&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=0fd6e119d1d6a0c71bab867f5e9d54ed7e8225f925a248a97a3e2d57e37c83ea&ipo=images

Could you please post the veil image on here?

Sure.

The image on the actual veil is almost like a hologram, with the clarity being very dependent on the light.





Personally, I think the Veil is a much more remarkable artifact than the shroud.

...and from this image made without human hands comes the icon of Christ the Teacher.





That video describes the image, and its history once it was in custody of the RCC.

This is likely it's history from the tomb of Christ on that first easter morning till then:

The Image of Edessa was a holy relic consisting of a square or rectangle of cloth upon which a miraculous image of the face of Jesus Christ had been imprintedthe first icon (lit. 'image'). The image is also known as the Mandylion (Greek: , 'cloth' or 'towel'),[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_of_Edessa#cite_note-1][1][/url] in Eastern Orthodoxy, it is also known as Acheiropoieton (Greek: ' , lit. 'icon not made by hand').

Eusebius of Caesarea records that King Abgar of Edessa wrote to Jesus, asking him to come cure him of an illness. Abgar received a reply letter from Jesus, declining the invitation, but promising a future visit by one of his disciples. One of the seventy disciples, Thaddeus of Edessa, is said to have come to Edessa, bearing the words of Jesus, by the virtues of which the king was miraculously healed. Eusebius said that he had transcribed and translated the actual letter in the Syriac chancery documents of the king of Edessa. He brought the image with him.

Evagrius Scholasticus, writing about 593, who reports a portrait of Christ of divine origin (), which effected the miraculous aid in the defence of Edessa against the Persians in 544. The image was moved to Constantinople in the 10th century and carried by Byzantine armies.

Russian and allied armies carry it to this day:



The cloth disappeared when Constantinople was sacked in 1204 during the Fourth Crusade and probably brought to Rome where the documentary picks up. In 1629, Pope Urban the VIII ordered all existing images of Christ to be destroyed (so that they could paint a forgery and start displaying that). So the true face of Christ was lost in the west, but preserved in the east.

Why doesn't the image on the veil look anything like the AI image from the shroud of Turin?

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Why doesn't the image on the veil look anything like the AI image from the shroud of Turin?

---

If you look at the previous video, it shows the overlay of the two images.

Don't know, or care about anything AI, particularly when it comes to matters of faith.

Realitybites said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Why doesn't the image on the veil look anything like the AI image from the shroud of Turin?

---

If you look at the previous video, it shows the overlay of the two images.

Don't know, or care about anything AI, particularly when it comes to matters of faith.

---

So you only care about the evidence in favor of what you want to believe, but not the evidence against it. Interesting.

In both the Shroud and this veil, it's a flat image, like something you'd get on a flat photographic plate of film. But a veil or shroud covering a three-dimensional body is not flat - the image from the contact points on the body will be splayed out and distorted when the cloth is stretched out flat. I still have not heard a good explanation from anyone about this. I mean, that veil looks like a drawing, similar to how people's faces were drawn in art from that time period. It doesn't even look like an image that a real human face would produce. It's cartoonish. I really can't believe people take this seriously.

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Why doesn't the image on the veil look anything like the AI image from the shroud of Turin?

---

Have you noticed how similar the Academy Award trophy (the Oscar) is to the image on the Shroud? Same body posture and shape, except for where the hands are positioned. The shoulders and pectorals are almost identical.

You know, the Oscar, that golden idol they award to the players of Satan-controlled Hollywood? Same spirit behind them, perhaps? Just an interesting thought....

Realitybites said:

---

Sure.

---

I'm not sure what this is supposed to show. None of the points are the same in distance or angle between them.

Honestly, the veil looks like a drawing to match what's on the shroud, or vice versa.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Why doesn't the image on the veil look anything like the AI image from the shroud of Turin?

---

If you look at the previous video, it shows the overlay of the two images.

Don't know, or care about anything AI, particularly when it comes to matters of faith.

---

In both the Shroud and this veil, it's a flat image, like something you'd get on a flat photographic plate of film. But a veil or shroud covering a three-dimensional body is not flat - the image from the contact points on the body will be splayed out and distorted when the cloth is stretched out flat. I still have not heard a good explanation from anyone about this.

---

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330311578_The_Turin_Shroud_was_not_flattened_before_the_images_formed#

Quote:

---

So you only care about the evidence in favor of what you want to believe, but not the evidence against it. Interesting.

---

Of course. That should be the standard position for all Christians. It is the Christian *faith*. The object and author of that faith is God. While things in the physical realm (artifacts, sacraments) can strengthen that faith, they can never impeach it.

This is one of the many things your Christian Scientism misses. If you don't believe that you're 30 pieces of silver and a rope away from retracing Judas' steps.

Sam Lowry said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Why doesn't the image on the veil look anything like the AI image from the shroud of Turin?

---

If you look at the previous video, it shows the overlay of the two images.

Don't know, or care about anything AI, particularly when it comes to matters of faith.

---

In both the Shroud and this veil, it's a flat image, like something you'd get on a flat photographic plate of film. But a veil or shroud covering a three-dimensional body is not flat - the image from the contact points on the body will be splayed out and distorted when the cloth is stretched out flat. I still have not heard a good explanation from anyone about this.

---

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330311578_The_Turin_Shroud_was_not_flattened_before_the_images_formed#

---

LOL. Look at the model "sheet" that this person used to come with his explanation (Fig. 4) It is nearly flat and only contacts the nose and mysteriously floats over the body. Basically, as flat as he could possibly make it - and even still he had to postulate that the image came only from projections perpendicular to the ground, not radiating outward. Interesting phenomena that defies the physics of light and radiation. Jesus wasn't covered in a piece of sheet metal. Look at pictures of how a dead body was wrapped in a shroud for burial. Scripture says Jesus was "wrapped" in the cloth and put in the tomb, not that a "sheet" of the hardest, stiffest cloth known to man hovered over his body. This "study" is flimsy to say the least. At most it's laughable nonsense. I will bet that peer reviews weren't so supportive, if there were any.

Realitybites said:

---

Quote:

---

So you only care about the evidence in favor of what you want to believe, but not the evidence against it. Interesting.

---

Of course. That should be the standard position for all Christians. It is the Christian *faith*. The object and author of that faith is God. While things in the physical realm (artifacts, sacraments) can strengthen that faith, they can never impeach it.

This is one of the many things your Christian Scientism misses. If you don't believe that you're 30 pieces of silver and a rope away from retracing Judas' steps.

---

Wow, just wow.

No, that isn't the "standard position" for Christians. It's the standard position of mindless cultists and pick and choose false teachers. Think Gnosticm, which rejected all the evidence for Jesus' physical body. For a modern day example, think Waco1947.

Apparently, scientific reasoning is "good" if it supports your belief, but if it goes against your belief it's "Christian Scientism" that will make you into a Judas Iscariot, therefore it should be ignored like a good Christian ought to.

It does, however, go to show how you believe we can't have assurance of salvation, even though you've been shown that the Bible clearly and directly tells us that we can. Same mentality.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Why doesn't the image on the veil look anything like the AI image from the shroud of Turin?

---

If you look at the previous video, it shows the overlay of the two images.

Don't know, or care about anything AI, particularly when it comes to matters of faith.

---

In both the Shroud and this veil, it's a flat image, like something you'd get on a flat photographic plate of film. But a veil or shroud covering a three-dimensional body is not flat - the image from the contact points on the body will be splayed out and distorted when the cloth is stretched out flat. I still have not heard a good explanation from anyone about this.

---

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330311578_The_Turin_Shroud_was_not_flattened_before_the_images_formed#

---

LOL. Look at the model "sheet" that this person used to come with his explanation (Fig. 4) It is nearly flat and only contacts the nose and mysteriously floats over the body. Basically, as flat as he could possibly make it - and even still he had to postulate that the image came only from projections perpendicular to the ground, not radiating outward. Interesting phenomena that defies the physics of light and radiation. Jesus wasn't covered in a piece of sheet metal. Look at pictures of how a dead body was wrapped in a shroud for burial. Scripture says Jesus was "wrapped" in the cloth and put in the tomb, not that a "sheet" of the hardest, stiffest cloth known to man hovered over his body. This "study" is flimsy to say the least. At most it's laughable nonsense. I will bet that peer reviews weren't so supportive, if there were any.

---

A careful reading of the paper would answer those concerns. I'm just putting it out there FYI.

Sam Lowry said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Why doesn't the image on the veil look anything like the AI image from the shroud of Turin?

---

If you look at the previous video, it shows the overlay of the two images.

Don't know, or care about anything AI, particularly when it comes to matters of faith.

---

In both the Shroud and this veil, it's a flat image, like something you'd get on a flat photographic plate of film. But a veil or shroud covering a three-dimensional body is not flat - the image from the contact points on the body will be splayed out and distorted when the cloth is stretched out flat. I still have not heard a good explanation from anyone about this.

---

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330311578_The_Turin_Shroud_was_not_flattened_before_the_images_formed#

---

LOL. Look at the model "sheet" that this person used to come with his explanation (Fig. 4) It is nearly flat and only contacts the nose and mysteriously floats over the body. Basically, as flat as he could possibly make it - and even still he had to postulate that the image came only from projections perpendicular to the ground, not radiating outward. Interesting phenomena that defies the physics of light and radiation. Jesus wasn't covered in a piece of sheet metal. Look at pictures of how a dead body was wrapped in a shroud for burial. Scripture says Jesus was "wrapped" in the cloth and put in the tomb, not that a "sheet" of the hardest, stiffest cloth known to man hovered over his body. This "study" is flimsy to say the least. At most it's laughable nonsense. I will bet that peer reviews weren't so supportive, if there were any.

---

A careful reading of the paper would answer those concerns. I'm just putting it out there FYI.

---

Then go ahead and explain it.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Absolutely nowhere in Scripture is there the idea that we can withdraw from a "treasury of merit" the merits of others and apply it to ourselves, or deposit our merit for others to claim. Every verse you reference doesn't say anything of the sort. As you always do, you're reading all of this into bible verse in order to come out with the belief that you want.

---

The gospel is very clear about us storing up our works in heaven. Matthew 6:19-21. I'm sorry that you look past this.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

For you to believe that Paul is saying that Jesus' suffering was "lacking" in its ability to clear us from sin so he had to make up for it, is about as heretical as anything you've ever said. Which is saying a lot.

---

Whoa! Talk about reading into posts! I never said that.

Paul is encouraging us to join our sufferings with Christ's.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

The books of the canon, icon veneration, and the dogmas of Mary are all declared as infallible teaching. For reasons already explained and proven, this clearly shows the Roman Catholic Church is not without error. No misunderstanding there. I don't even know what your point that "the entire council is not infallible" is even supposed to be refuting. In fact, it's supporting my whole point.

---

The books of the canon and the dogma's of Mary are infallible.

Your "reasons" have only been proven in your mind. The dogmas are solid biblically, rationally, and in tradition (the Church fathers.) You refuse to accept them due to your bias and brainwashing.

No one entire counsel in infallible. Only certain teachings, which are explicitly stated, are infallible.

Icon veneration (which is good) is not an infallible teaching.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Virtually everyone sees through this lie.

---

Quite frankly, I don't care.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

The consensus here is that the RCC worships Mary, as it is PAINFULLY obvious from all the examples I've given. You'd have to be a complete fool not to see it. As I already said, even those who hate to agree with me sees it and knows it.

---

Worship is the believing that Mary is God. Catholic do not do that. I have asked repeatedly for you to provide one doctrine or official magisterial teaching that we should revere her as God. You can't because, we don't.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Nothing more needs to be said to you about this, really, at this point. You are so firmly entrenched in denial and deception, that it is heartbreaking. You aren't a Christian. You are an idolater, a Marian cultist. You can still see the error of your ways and repent, though, before it's too late, if you'd just humble yourself and take an honest look at what you're doing and saying.

---

These are the remarks are a rambling man. I feel for you. My Church was established by Jesus himself. It is a HISTORICAL fact. Your church, if you have one, was made up by you or someone who has deviated from the original version of Christianity. I'm guessing it is less than 50 years old. You have no authority. You would have no bible if it weren't for the Catholic Church.

I hope that one day you will see the light and repent of your false accusations and heresies. I pray that you will come into to full communion with the TRUE Church that Jesus created. He wants you (and all) to be Catholic.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

[ Have you noticed how similar the Academy Award trophy (the Oscar) is to the image on the Shroud? Same body posture and shape, except for where the hands are positioned. The shoulders and pectorals are almost identical.

You know, the Oscar, that golden idol they award to the players of Satan-controlled Hollywood? Same spirit behind them, perhaps? Just an interesting thought....

---

Wow! Do you drink tea with the Church Lady from SNL's Church Chat? I guess when you can't accept something it's always Satan


Seriously. I guess it's hard for you to believe that men could have the same body posture and shape. Also, the shoulders of the man in the shroud are not altogether visible because of the burn marks that were caused by the fire of Chambry in the 1500's.

The "Oscar" was designed in the image of a knight in 1929. The only thing that remains of the knight is his sword. The sword represented the protection for the welfare and advancement of the industry.

I don't think Satan took over Hollywood until the late 60's. ; )

You are really stretching here and losing what credibility you have with comments like those.

Oldbear83 said:

---

I believe you are very mistaken about the nature and purpose of treasures in heaven.

They are not transferable, nor should they be confused with currency for transactions.

It is more the case, I suggest, of becoming who we are capable of becoming,

So too, there is treasure beyond price in having a name in the Lord's Household. It's not the kind of thing to be compared to a bank account or imagine that it earns our Salvation - that comes from Christ alone!

---

Where does it say that our merit is non-transferrable? The bible is clear about us storing our treasure in heaven Matthew 6:19-21.

The Church's treasury, enriched by Christ's merits, is shared among the faithful. This concept is rooted in the communion of saints, where the merits of Christ and the saints benefit the whole Church.

Christians are all part of the body of Christ. St. Paul makes that clear in 1 Cor 12.

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Absolutely nowhere in Scripture is there the idea that we can withdraw from a "treasury of merit" the merits of others and apply it to ourselves, or deposit our merit for others to claim. Every verse you reference doesn't say anything of the sort. As you always do, you're reading all of this into bible verse in order to come out with the belief that you want.

---

The gospel is very clear about us storing up our works in heaven. Matthew 6:19-21. I'm sorry that you look past this.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

For you to believe that Paul is saying that Jesus' suffering was "lacking" in its ability to clear us from sin so he had to make up for it, is about as heretical as anything you've ever said. Which is saying a lot.

---

Whoa! Talk about reading into posts! I never said that.

Paul is encouraging us to join our sufferings with Christ's.

---

First of all, we store our treasures in heaven, not our works. And no one is saying that we don't. What you are trying to claim is that this is saying our treasures in heaven are a "bank" that someone else can claim, and likewise we can claim from others. There is nothing in Scripture whatsoever that even suggests this. You can't even keep focused on the argument at hand.

Whatever you're trying to say about Paul and Jesus' sufferings, again, you're not making the case at all that this is saying that there is a treasury of merit that we can claim for ourselves to lessen our suffering in "purgatory".

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

The books of the canon, icon veneration, and the dogmas of Mary are all declared as infallible teaching. For reasons already explained and proven, this clearly shows the Roman Catholic Church is not without error. No misunderstanding there. I don't even know what your point that "the entire council is not infallible" is even supposed to be refuting. In fact, it's supporting my whole point.

---

The books of the canon and the dogma's of Mary are infallible.

Your "reasons" have only been proven in your mind. The dogmas are solid biblically, rationally, and in tradition (the Church fathers.) You refuse to accept them due to your bias and brainwashing.

No one entire counsel in infallible. Only certain teachings, which are explicitly stated, are infallible.

Icon veneration (which is good) is not an infallible teaching.

---

If the books of the canon are infallible, then which canon that has been approved by Roman Catholic Councils are you talking about? Because they approved different ones, even ones that excluded the apocryphal books.

The dogmas of Mary are NOWHERE to be found in the early church, let alone in the Bible. I refuse to accept them because I am a Christian and not a Marian cultist like yourself. You can't see how evil the Marian dogmas are, because you are not a true Christian. I hate to say it, but it's simple as that. Any true Christian who has the Holy Spirit can EASILY see the heresy and idolatry in those dogmas, as well as in the Mary worship you so obviously engage in.

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Virtually everyone sees through this lie.

---

Quite frankly, I don't care.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

The consensus here is that the RCC worships Mary, as it is PAINFULLY obvious from all the examples I've given. You'd have to be a complete fool not to see it. As I already said, even those who hate to agree with me sees it and knows it.

---

Worship is the believing that Mary is God. Catholic do not do that. I have asked repeatedly for you to provide one doctrine or official magisterial teaching that we should revere her as God. You can't because, we don't.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Nothing more needs to be said to you about this, really, at this point. You are so firmly entrenched in denial and deception, that it is heartbreaking. You aren't a Christian. You are an idolater, a Marian cultist. You can still see the error of your ways and repent, though, before it's too late, if you'd just humble yourself and take an honest look at what you're doing and saying.

---

These are the remarks are a rambling man. I feel for you. My Church was established by Jesus himself. It is a HISTORICAL fact. Your church, if you have one, was made up by you or someone who has deviated from the original version of Christianity. I'm guessing it is less than 50 years old. You have no authority. You would have no bible if it weren't for the Catholic Church.

I hope that one day you will see the light and repent of your false accusations and heresies. I pray that you will come into to full communion with the TRUE Church that Jesus created. He wants you (and all) to be Catholic.

---

You are so blind and deceived, it is straight up remarkable.

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

[ Have you noticed how similar the Academy Award trophy (the Oscar) is to the image on the Shroud? Same body posture and shape, except for where the hands are positioned. The shoulders and pectorals are almost identical.

You know, the Oscar, that golden idol they award to the players of Satan-controlled Hollywood? Same spirit behind them, perhaps? Just an interesting thought....

---

Wow! Do you drink tea with the Church Lady from SNL's Church Chat? I guess when you can't accept something it's always Satan


Seriously. I guess it's hard for you to believe that men could have the same body posture and shape. Also, the shoulders of the man in the shroud are not altogether visible because of the burn marks that were caused by the fire of Chambry in the 1500's.

The "Oscar" was designed in the image of a knight in 1929. The only thing that remains of the knight is his sword. The sword represented the protection for the welfare and advancement of the industry.

I don't think Satan took over Hollywood until the late 60's. ; )

You are really stretching here and losing what credibility you have with comments like those.

---

It was just a thought for Christians who truly seek the truth and want to honor and worship Jesus alone. It wasn't for Marian idolaters. The fact that you, a Marian, have so easily bought into the Shroud being real actually makes my case against it even stronger.

Realitybites said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Why doesn't the image on the veil look anything like the AI image from the shroud of Turin?

---

If you look at the previous video, it shows the overlay of the two images.

Don't know, or care about anything AI, particularly when it comes to matters of faith.

---

Well, no matter what about the Shroud, my faith is not in the Shroud.

It's a very dangerous thing to imagine you can do whatever you want unless someone points out a verse that you choose to consider applicable.

More dangerous than that, to decide that God must play by your rules.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Apparently, scientific reasoning is "good" if it supports your belief, but if it goes against your belief it's "Christian Scientism" that will make you into a Judas Iscariot, therefore it should be ignored like a good Christian ought to..

---

Precisely. The Triune God, not human reason, is our God.

Humanists have spent a few hundred years trying to overthrow the Christian faith under the banner of science.

When God and science are in agreement, great. When they are in conflict, revelation trumps observation.

Realitybites said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Apparently, scientific reasoning is "good" if it supports your belief, but if it goes against your belief it's "Christian Scientism" that will make you into a Judas Iscariot, therefore it should be ignored like a good Christian ought to..

---

Precisely. The Triune God, not human reason, is our God.

Humanists have spent a few hundred years trying to overthrow the Christian faith under the banner of science.

When God and science are in agreement, great. When they are in conflict, revelation trumps observation.

---

Rational people call this "picking and choosing".

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone

---

That verse is not saying that you are saved by Works. It's saying that true faith produces good works. It's a difficult passage on it's own, but when compared to the rest of Scripture, it's obvious that Salvation is by GRACE through FAITH alone, but true faith produces good works because when you truly believe something, you act upon that belief.

---

So what you're saying is what the Christian church of the first millenium said.

Salvation is by grace, through faith, evidenced by works...and a fruitless faith is a dead faith that saves no one.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Apparently, scientific reasoning is "good" if it supports your belief, but if it goes against your belief it's "Christian Scientism" that will make you into a Judas Iscariot, therefore it should be ignored like a good Christian ought to..

---

Precisely. The Triune God, not human reason, is our God.

Humanists have spent a few hundred years trying to overthrow the Christian faith under the banner of science.

When God and science are in agreement, great. When they are in conflict, revelation trumps observation.

---

Rational people call this "picking and choosing".

---

Yep.

God is greater than science.

Science does not have the authority to contradict God.

Therefore science that on its face contradicts divine revelation is wrong.

Tell me, do you believe the testimony of Genesis that God created the world in seven, 24 hour long days?

Realitybites said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Apparently, scientific reasoning is "good" if it supports your belief, but if it goes against your belief it's "Christian Scientism" that will make you into a Judas Iscariot, therefore it should be ignored like a good Christian ought to..

---

Precisely. The Triune God, not human reason, is our God.

Humanists have spent a few hundred years trying to overthrow the Christian faith under the banner of science.

When God and science are in agreement, great. When they are in conflict, revelation trumps observation.

---

Rational people call this "picking and choosing".

---

Yep.

God is greater than science.

Science does not have the authority to contradict God.

Therefore science that on its face contradicts divine revelation is wrong.

Tell me, do you believe the testimony of Genesis that God created the world in seven, 24 hour long days?

---

Here's how you're arguing:

You: "I have a newly discovered writing by the apostle Paul - it is authentic because science has shown that the type of paper is typical for the time period, plus pollen spores embedded in it are native to the area he was from. Radiocarbon dating has it earlier than 300 A.D."

Skeptic: "But Paul couldn't have written it. It contained references to events that happened more than a hundred years after his death. Plus the ink that was used was only available in far east Asia where Paul never traveled."

You: "Oh, you and your SCIENTISM. Where's your faith? God is not limited by such things. What are you, another Judas Iscariot? This "science" of yours doesn't have the authority to contradict what God has revealed."

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Apparently, scientific reasoning is "good" if it supports your belief, but if it goes against your belief it's "Christian Scientism" that will make you into a Judas Iscariot, therefore it should be ignored like a good Christian ought to..

---

Precisely. The Triune God, not human reason, is our God.

Humanists have spent a few hundred years trying to overthrow the Christian faith under the banner of science.

When God and science are in agreement, great. When they are in conflict, revelation trumps observation.

---

Rational people call this "picking and choosing".

---

Yep.

God is greater than science.

Science does not have the authority to contradict God.

Therefore science that on its face contradicts divine revelation is wrong.

Tell me, do you believe the testimony of Genesis that God created the world in seven, 24 hour long days?

---

Here's how you're arguing:

You: "I have a newly discovered writing by the apostle Paul - it is authentic because science has shown that the type of paper is typical for the time period, plus pollen spores embedded in it are native to the area he was from. Radiocarbon dating has it earlier than 300 A.D."

Skeptic: "But Paul couldn't have written it. It contained references to events that happened more than a hundred years after his death. Plus the ink that was used was only available in far east Asia where Paul never traveled."

You: "Oh, you and your SCIENTISM. Where's your faith? God is not limited by such things. What are you, another Judas Iscariot? This "science" of yours doesn't have the authority to contradict what God has revealed."

---

well, people thought trig was invented by the greeks but we now have discovered that the Sumerians used base 60 trig thousands of years prior..

4th and Inches said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Apparently, scientific reasoning is "good" if it supports your belief, but if it goes against your belief it's "Christian Scientism" that will make you into a Judas Iscariot, therefore it should be ignored like a good Christian ought to..

---

Precisely. The Triune God, not human reason, is our God.

Humanists have spent a few hundred years trying to overthrow the Christian faith under the banner of science.

When God and science are in agreement, great. When they are in conflict, revelation trumps observation.

---

Rational people call this "picking and choosing".

---

Yep.

God is greater than science.

Science does not have the authority to contradict God.

Therefore science that on its face contradicts divine revelation is wrong.

Tell me, do you believe the testimony of Genesis that God created the world in seven, 24 hour long days?

---

Here's how you're arguing:

You: "I have a newly discovered writing by the apostle Paul - it is authentic because science has shown that the type of paper is typical for the time period, plus pollen spores embedded in it are native to the area he was from. Radiocarbon dating has it earlier than 300 A.D."

Skeptic: "But Paul couldn't have written it. It contained references to events that happened more than a hundred years after his death. Plus the ink that was used was only available in far east Asia where Paul never traveled."

You: "Oh, you and your SCIENTISM. Where's your faith? God is not limited by such things. What are you, another Judas Iscariot? This "science" of yours doesn't have the authority to contradict what God has revealed."

---

well, people thought trig was invented by the greeks but we now have discovered that the Sumerians used base 60 trig thousands of years prior..

---

Not sure how that's relevant to my point, but thanks.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Apparently, scientific reasoning is "good" if it supports your belief, but if it goes against your belief it's "Christian Scientism" that will make you into a Judas Iscariot, therefore it should be ignored like a good Christian ought to..

---

Precisely. The Triune God, not human reason, is our God.

Humanists have spent a few hundred years trying to overthrow the Christian faith under the banner of science.

When God and science are in agreement, great. When they are in conflict, revelation trumps observation.

---

Rational people call this "picking and choosing".

---

Yep.

God is greater than science.

Science does not have the authority to contradict God.

Therefore science that on its face contradicts divine revelation is wrong.

Tell me, do you believe the testimony of Genesis that God created the world in seven, 24 hour long days?

---

Here's how you're arguing:

You: "I have a newly discovered writing by the apostle Paul - it is authentic because science has shown that the type of paper is typical for the time period, plus pollen spores embedded in it are native to the area he was from. Radiocarbon dating has it earlier than 300 A.D."

Skeptic: "But Paul couldn't have written it. It contained references to events that happened more than a hundred years after his death. Plus the ink that was used was only available in far east Asia where Paul never traveled."

You: "Oh, you and your SCIENTISM. Where's your faith? God is not limited by such things. What are you, another Judas Iscariot? This "science" of yours doesn't have the authority to contradict what God has revealed."

---

well, people thought trig was invented by the greeks but we now have discovered that the Sumerians used base 60 trig thousands of years prior..

---

Not sure how that's relevant to my point, but thanks.

---

just pointing out that our understanding of science and history Knowledgebase is very limited and often inacurate

4th and Inches said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Apparently, scientific reasoning is "good" if it supports your belief, but if it goes against your belief it's "Christian Scientism" that will make you into a Judas Iscariot, therefore it should be ignored like a good Christian ought to..

---

Precisely. The Triune God, not human reason, is our God.

Humanists have spent a few hundred years trying to overthrow the Christian faith under the banner of science.

When God and science are in agreement, great. When they are in conflict, revelation trumps observation.

---

Rational people call this "picking and choosing".

---

Yep.

God is greater than science.

Science does not have the authority to contradict God.

Therefore science that on its face contradicts divine revelation is wrong.

Tell me, do you believe the testimony of Genesis that God created the world in seven, 24 hour long days?

---

Here's how you're arguing:

You: "I have a newly discovered writing by the apostle Paul - it is authentic because science has shown that the type of paper is typical for the time period, plus pollen spores embedded in it are native to the area he was from. Radiocarbon dating has it earlier than 300 A.D."

Skeptic: "But Paul couldn't have written it. It contained references to events that happened more than a hundred years after his death. Plus the ink that was used was only available in far east Asia where Paul never traveled."

You: "Oh, you and your SCIENTISM. Where's your faith? God is not limited by such things. What are you, another Judas Iscariot? This "science" of yours doesn't have the authority to contradict what God has revealed."

---

well, people thought trig was invented by the greeks but we now have discovered that the Sumerians used base 60 trig thousands of years prior..

---

Not sure how that's relevant to my point, but thanks.

---

just pointing out that our understanding of science and history Knowledgebase is very limited and often inacurate

---

Right. But it was just a hypothetical to make the point that "science/logic/reason that supports me = good, science/logic/reason that doesn't = bad" isn't tenable.