Oldbear83 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Just apologize for being an ass. Bad look to keep repeating the lie.

---

You appear to be showing yours yet again. Like when that other poster lost his or her mind for all to see.

If you disagree you should take it up with those that count such things. Not for Catholics to defend.

---

I'm not repeating the lie that Protestants believe in 45,000 different religions. That's you.

You really should retract that slander.

Or do you want us to think you are the Roman Pharisee here?

---

Not concerned what you may think. Just stating what exists. Whether you believe it or not doesn't chamge things.

How many flavors are there then? Only 10,000? Is it greater than 1 is all that matters.

Oldbear83 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Look at what he wrote. Said Protestants had a lot of "religions" to choose from.

And that's a lie.

---

he orignally said 45000 "versions" post schism to choose from

Maybe he said religions later

---

Check his 4:35 post.

---

Is that the hill youre on? Ok so you agree the 45,000 versions of non-Catholic Christianity to choose from. Got it.

Coke Bear said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Not exactly.

It may appear as if most Protestants believe that Catholics are saved, but that is only because most Protestants are ignorant of what the catholic church teaches about salvation, dispensing of grace, the treasury of merit, etc.

For years I had no idea what was going on in Catholicism. Then I attended a catholic funeral mass for an in-law, and was shocked by what they were doing & teaching. Dozens & dozens of prayers to Mary and only a handful of prayers to God. I had many discussions with the catholic side of the family afterwards, and they recommended i read the Catechisms of the church if I wanted to know what the church teaches.

It was a very sad & shocking revelation that so many are being lead into such a false religion.

Very sad

---

I've been to countless Catholic funeral masses and never have I heard "dozens and dozens of prayers to Mary."

You were most likely at a Rosary for your in-law. These are usually held the night before the actual funeral mass.

If you're not familiar with the Rosary, I'd provide a slight bit of history behind it.

Monks and clergy used to recite or chant the 150 Psalms every day for worship. People living near the monasteries and abbeys saw the beauty in this devotion; however, they were unable to read or memorize the lengthy Psalms so it was suggested that they pray the Lord's Prayer 150 time in place of the Psalms.

By the 8th Century, the Celtic Church in Gaelic Ireland created Pater Noster (Our Father in Latin) Cords with 150 knots or with 50 knots and they could pray it three times.

By the 12th century, the Angelic Salutation (Luke 1:28 - Annunciation & 1:42 Visitation)- Ave Maria or Hail Mary had become popular and the second devotion began.

By the early 13th century, St Dominic, who founded the Dominicans in order to battle the Albigensian Crisis, as tradition states saw a vision of the Blessed Mother who instructed him on the structure of the Rosary that we have today.

The Rosary starts with The Apostles Creed, Our Father, three Hail Mary's (offered for faith, hope, & love), and the Gloria Patri (Latin for "Glory to the Father") or the Lesser Doxology (or Minor Doxology).

Next the Rosary is divided into 5 decades which include 1 Our Father, 10 Hail Mary's, and the Glory Be.

There are three Mysteries (now 4, but that's a different story) that are part of the original Rosary - The Glorious, Joyful, and the Sorrowful (my personal favorite).

Praying all three Mysteries (5 decades each) equals 150 Hail Mary's.

Each Mystery have 5 "points" that we are to concentrate or meditate on while saying that decade.

For instance, during the Joyful Mysteries, we focus on the following during each decade:
The Annunciation of the Angel Gabriel to Mary.
The Visitation of Mary to Elizabeth.
The Birth of Jesus in Bethlehem of Judea.
The Presentation of Jesus in the Temple.
The Finding of Jesus in the Temple.

• The Annunciation - Humility. The Angel Gabriel announces to Mary that she will conceive Jesus (Luke 1:26-38).
• The Visitation - Charity (Love of Neighbor). Mary visits her cousin Elizabeth, who is pregnant with John the Baptist (Luke 1:39-56).
• The Nativity - Poverty of Spirit (Detachment). Jesus is born in Bethlehem (Luke 2:1-20).
• The Presentation in the Temple - Obedience. Mary and Joseph present the baby Jesus in the Temple (Luke 2:22-40).
• The Finding of the Child Jesus in the Temple - Piety. Mary and Joseph find the 12-year-old Jesus teaching in the Temple (Luke 2:41-50).

The Sorrowful Mysteries we focus on:

• The Agony in the Garden - Contrition (Sorrow for Sin). Jesus prays in the Garden of Gethsemane, experiencing great sorrow (Matthew 26:36-46).
• The Scourging at the Pillar - Mortification (Self-Discipline). Jesus is brutally whipped at Pilate's command (John 19:1).
• The Crowning with Thorns - Moral Courage. Soldiers mock Jesus by placing a crown of thorns on His head (Matthew 27:29).
• The Carrying of the Cross - Patience in Suffering. Jesus carries His cross to Calvary (John 19:17).
• The Crucifixion and Death of Jesus - Perseverance and Mercy. Jesus is nailed to the cross and dies for our sins (Luke 23:33-46).

The beautiful part about this is one can enter so deeply into Christ's life during the Rosary. You can imagine what it would be like to be watching these events. You can imagine yourself as anyone in this story. Your mind can color what we read in scripture. That's how we are to pray the Rosary.

TL;DR, no Catholic funeral has "dozens and dozens of prayers to Mary." The rosary does have prayers to Mary, but when we listen closely, we realize that they are Christocentric.

Finally, I'm sorry that your family didn't have specific answers to your questions. Not all Catholics are prepared to answer these questions, just like not all protestants can answer questions from atheists.

If you ever have serious questions (issues, challenges, or objections) about Catholicism, please PM me. I will do my best to answer your questions. If I don't know an answer, I know people that will.

Finally, if you're ever in Waco and wanted to discuss these issues, I'd be happy to meet you at George's and enjoy a few beers (beverages.)

---

Beautifully said

Much wisdom in this post

Good succinct summary on some kf rhe misunderstandings here

Dishonest enough to deny what you actually posted ?

That's disappointing.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Dishonest enough to deny what you actually posted ?

That's disappointing.

---

Huh?

Fre3dombear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Dishonest enough to deny what you actually posted ?

That's disappointing.

---

Huh?

---

You left this little pot shot at Protestants:

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/159792/replies/4549364

"Guess and youve got a 1 in 45,000 chance of being right. They have lots of religions to choose from."

(bold emphasis added to show the larger offense, not that there are 45,000 different denominations in truth)

Hiding from it now is beneath you.

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So how was it made, TS?

---

Watch the video.

---

No one has been able to recreate the Shroud.

You still have the burden for your claim.

Science, after all.

---

Uh, I think you need to watch the video before you say that.

---

Take your own advice.

That video is just a couple guys who dismiss the Shroud, but could not reproduce it.

Your opinion is not proof, boyo. It's not even real Science.

---

It's obvious you didn't watch the video and don't know the subject matter/content. Just one guy. Know what you're talking about before you comment.

---

I know quite a bit about the matter. One biased video hardly moves the needle.

---

Then you know the Shroud has all the markings of a fraudulent relic.

---

Not really. And no one has made one, to show how it was done.

---

The Church has limited its examination. What has been allowed has been enough to call into question its authenticity as a burial shroud dating in early first century. The Church holds it out as a tease. If it were a testament to an all powerful supernatural god, whose objective is to convince the world to believe, then that god wouldn't hide it in mystery. That god would make sure its authenticity is unquestioned, and make it abundantly clear to the world.

---

its almost like you never read the bible..

Where does it say Gods objective is to convince everyone to believe?

---

The so called "Great Commission."

---

Matthew 28:19 is part of the Great Commission, where Jesus instructs His disciples to "go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

Doesnt say go make all people disciples, just disciples of all nations..

What else you got?

---

I have a better understanding of the English lanuage than you apparently. Nations are figments of people's collective imaginations, comprised of people.

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So how was it made, TS?

---

Watch the video.

---

No one has been able to recreate the Shroud.

You still have the burden for your claim.

Science, after all.

---

Uh, I think you need to watch the video before you say that.

---

Take your own advice.

That video is just a couple guys who dismiss the Shroud, but could not reproduce it.

Your opinion is not proof, boyo. It's not even real Science.

---

It's obvious you didn't watch the video and don't know the subject matter/content. Just one guy. Know what you're talking about before you comment.

---

I know quite a bit about the matter. One biased video hardly moves the needle.

---

Then you know the Shroud has all the markings of a fraudulent relic.

---

Not really. And no one has made one, to show how it was done.

---

The Church has limited its examination. What has been allowed has been enough to call into question its authenticity as a burial shroud dating in early first century. The Church holds it out as a tease. If it were a testament to an all powerful supernatural god, whose objective is to convince the world to believe, then that god wouldn't hide it in mystery. That god would make sure its authenticity is unquestioned, and make it abundantly clear to the world.

---

First, I cannot help but notice you completely ignored my posts which focused specifically on the scientific debate. You have always crowed how Science admits when it is wrong and makes corrections; well sir there are quite a few scientists who dispute the testing methodology and the actual age of the Shroud, with real evidence for it's 1st Century creation out there. If you want to be a real scientist, you should

I also note that you continue to ignore the fact that no one has been able to recreate the thing. You toss out claims that it's a fraud, yet if that is so it's a very strange fraud, one no one has been able to duplicate, and among other things even the medieval date you prefer predates the invention of photography and 3-dimensional imaging by several centuries. Make one or show someone who made one using the technology of the 14th century and you have something, but for now your argument is specious by definition.

Finally, you might consider that I raised questions you could have used with validity, but I won't bring them up here because I really do think you should consider the long post with links that more than answers your continued unsupported claims.

---

I gave you a thorough analyis and examintation of the claims about the shroud, addressing the the science, and a refutation of your claims, point by point, that you obviously have ingnored.

If the claims about the shroud were true, the god of Christianity would want to proclaim "truth" to the world. And, certainly, if it were true, the Church would have it thoroughly examined, and proclaimed in support of the '"truth" and the "Church."

If the Church believed it to be real, to which it will not stipulate, it wouldn't hide behind keeping it secret. Perhaps they found it in the Talpiot Tomb?

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

anSo how was it made, TS?

---

Watch the video.

---

No one has been able to recreate the Shroud.

You still have the burden for your claim.

Science, after all.

---

Uh, I think you need to watch the video before you say that.

---

Take your own advice.

That video is just a couple guys who dismiss the Shroud, but could not reproduce it.

Your opinion is not proof, boyo. It's not even real Science.

---

It's obvious you didn't watch the video and don't know the subject matter/content. Just one guy. Know what you're talking about before you comment.

---

I know quite a bit about the matter. One biased video hardly moves the needle.

---

Then you know the Shroud has all the markings of a fraudulent relic.

---

Not really. And no one has made one, to show how it was done.

---

The Church has limited its examination. What has been allowed has been enough to call into question its authenticity as a burial shroud dating in early first century. The Church holds it out as a tease. If it were a testament to an all powerful supernatural god, whose objective is to convince the world to believe, then that god wouldn't hide it in mystery. That god would make sure its authenticity is unquestioned, and make it abundantly clear to the world.

---

First, I cannot help but notice you completely ignored my posts which focused specifically on the scientific debate. You have always crowed how Science admits when it is wrong and makes corrections; well sir there are quite a few scientists who dispute the testing methodology and the actual age of the Shroud, with real evidence for it's 1st Century creation out there. If you want to be a real scientist, you should

I also note that you continue to ignore the fact that no one has been able to recreate the thing. You toss out claims that it's a fraud, yet if that is so it's a very strange fraud, one no one has been able to duplicate, and among other things even the medieval date you prefer predates the invention of photography and 3-dimensional imaging by several centuries. Make one or show someone who made one using the technology of the 14th century and you have something, but for now your argument is specious by definition.

Finally, you might consider that I raised questions you could have used with validity, but I won't bring them up here because I really do think you should consider the long post with links that more than answers your continued unsupported claims.

---

I gave you a thorough analyis and examintation of the claims about the shroud, addressing the the science, and a refutation of your claims, point by point, that you obviously have ingnored.

If the claims about the shroud were true, the god of Christianity would want to proclaim "truth" to the world. And, certainly, if it were true, the Church would have it thoroughly examined, and proclaimed in support of the '"truth" and the "Church."

If the Church believed it to be real, to which it will not stipulate, it wouldn't hide behind keeping it secret. Perhaps they found it in the Talpiot Tomb?

---

If you really want an honest talk, address my post with all the links.

Right now you are 2 notches below Jerry Springer.

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So how was it made, TS?

---

Watch the video.

---

No one has been able to recreate the Shroud.

You still have the burden for your claim.

Science, after all.

---

Uh, I think you need to watch the video before you say that.

---

Take your own advice.

That video is just a couple guys who dismiss the Shroud, but could not reproduce it.

Your opinion is not proof, boyo. It's not even real Science.

---

It's obvious you didn't watch the video and don't know the subject matter/content. Just one guy. Know what you're talking about before you comment.

---

I know quite a bit about the matter. One biased video hardly moves the needle.

---

Then you know the Shroud has all the markings of a fraudulent relic.

---

Not really. And no one has made one, to show how it was done.

---

The Church has limited its examination. What has been allowed has been enough to call into question its authenticity as a burial shroud dating in early first century. The Church holds it out as a tease. If it were a testament to an all powerful supernatural god, whose objective is to convince the world to believe, then that god wouldn't hide it in mystery. That god would make sure its authenticity is unquestioned, and make it abundantly clear to the world.

---

its almost like you never read the bible..

Where does it say Gods objective is to convince everyone to believe?

---

The so called "Great Commission."

---

Matthew 28:19 is part of the Great Commission, where Jesus instructs His disciples to "go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

Doesnt say go make all people disciples, just disciples of all nations..

What else you got?

---

I have a better understanding of the English lanuage than you apparently. Nations are figments of people's collective imaginations, comprised of people.

---

yawn.. you know it wasnt written in english right?

28:19

From Jewish Bible- Therefore, go and make people from all nations into talmidim, immersing them into the reality of the Father, the Son and the Ruach HaKodesh,

King James 1611 - Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Latin - euntes ergo docete omnes gentes baptizantes eos in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti(says teach all nations)

Go to the people of all nations and make them my disciples. Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,

Maybe the EASY translation will help you out-
So you must go to people in every country of the world. Teach them how to become my disciples. Baptize them by the authority of God the Father, his Son and the Holy Spirit.

EHV- Therefore go and gather disciples from all nations by baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

ISV- Therefore, as you go, disciple people in all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit,

As I said, it says go teach the world, not everyone will be a disciple.. parable of the sower was core teaching. Jesus clearly knew not all would come to Father.

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

anSo how was it made, TS?

---

Watch the video.

---

No one has been able to recreate the Shroud.

You still have the burden for your claim.

Science, after all.

---

Uh, I think you need to watch the video before you say that.

---

Take your own advice.

That video is just a couple guys who dismiss the Shroud, but could not reproduce it.

Your opinion is not proof, boyo. It's not even real Science.

---

It's obvious you didn't watch the video and don't know the subject matter/content. Just one guy. Know what you're talking about before you comment.

---

I know quite a bit about the matter. One biased video hardly moves the needle.

---

Then you know the Shroud has all the markings of a fraudulent relic.

---

Not really. And no one has made one, to show how it was done.

---

The Church has limited its examination. What has been allowed has been enough to call into question its authenticity as a burial shroud dating in early first century. The Church holds it out as a tease. If it were a testament to an all powerful supernatural god, whose objective is to convince the world to believe, then that god wouldn't hide it in mystery. That god would make sure its authenticity is unquestioned, and make it abundantly clear to the world.

---

First, I cannot help but notice you completely ignored my posts which focused specifically on the scientific debate. You have always crowed how Science admits when it is wrong and makes corrections; well sir there are quite a few scientists who dispute the testing methodology and the actual age of the Shroud, with real evidence for it's 1st Century creation out there. If you want to be a real scientist, you should

I also note that you continue to ignore the fact that no one has been able to recreate the thing. You toss out claims that it's a fraud, yet if that is so it's a very strange fraud, one no one has been able to duplicate, and among other things even the medieval date you prefer predates the invention of photography and 3-dimensional imaging by several centuries. Make one or show someone who made one using the technology of the 14th century and you have something, but for now your argument is specious by definition.

Finally, you might consider that I raised questions you could have used with validity, but I won't bring them up here because I really do think you should consider the long post with links that more than answers your continued unsupported claims.

---

I gave you a thorough analyis and examintation of the claims about the shroud, addressing the the science, and a refutation of your claims, point by point, that you obviously have ingnored.

If the claims about the shroud were true, the god of Christianity would want to proclaim "truth" to the world. And, certainly, if it were true, the Church would have it thoroughly examined, and proclaimed in support of the '"truth" and the "Church."

If the Church believed it to be real, to which it will not stipulate, it wouldn't hide behind keeping it secret. Perhaps they found it in the Talpiot Tomb?

---

If you really want an honest talk, address my post with all the links.

Right now you are 2 notches below Jerry Springer.

---

The post link I gave you addresses them in detail.

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So how was it made, TS?

---

Watch the video.

---

No one has been able to recreate the Shroud.

You still have the burden for your claim.

Science, after all.

---

Uh, I think you need to watch the video before you say that.

---

Take your own advice.

That video is just a couple guys who dismiss the Shroud, but could not reproduce it.

Your opinion is not proof, boyo. It's not even real Science.

---

It's obvious you didn't watch the video and don't know the subject matter/content. Just one guy. Know what you're talking about before you comment.

---

I know quite a bit about the matter. One biased video hardly moves the needle.

---

Then you know the Shroud has all the markings of a fraudulent relic.

---

Not really. And no one has made one, to show how it was done.

---

The Church has limited its examination. What has been allowed has been enough to call into question its authenticity as a burial shroud dating in early first century. The Church holds it out as a tease. If it were a testament to an all powerful supernatural god, whose objective is to convince the world to believe, then that god wouldn't hide it in mystery. That god would make sure its authenticity is unquestioned, and make it abundantly clear to the world.

---

its almost like you never read the bible..

Where does it say Gods objective is to convince everyone to believe?

---

The so called "Great Commission."

---

Matthew 28:19 is part of the Great Commission, where Jesus instructs His disciples to "go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

Doesnt say go make all people disciples, just disciples of all nations..

What else you got?

---

I have a better understanding of the English lanuage than you apparently. Nations are figments of people's collective imaginations, comprised of people.

---

yawn.. you know it wasnt written in english right?

28:19

From Jewish Bible- Therefore, go and make people from all nations into talmidim, immersing them into the reality of the Father, the Son and the Ruach HaKodesh,

King James 1611 - Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Latin - euntes ergo docete omnes gentes baptizantes eos in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti(says teach all nations)

Go to the people of all nations and make them my disciples. Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,

Maybe the EASY translation will help you out-
So you must go to people in every country of the world. Teach them how to become my disciples. Baptize them by the authority of God the Father, his Son and the Holy Spirit.

EHV- Therefore go and gather disciples from all nations by baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

ISV- Therefore, as you go, disciple people in all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit,

As I said, it says go teach the world, not everyone will be a disciple.. parable of the sower was core teaching. Jesus clearly knew not all would come to Father.

---

You're contradicting yourself now. How do you propose converting a nation other than one by one? By state theocratic edict - like when Christianity was proclaimed the state religion and became an instituon of the Roman government?

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So how was it made, TS?

---

Watch the video.

---

No one has been able to recreate the Shroud.

You still have the burden for your claim.

Science, after all.

---

Uh, I think you need to watch the video before you say that.

---

Take your own advice.

That video is just a couple guys who dismiss the Shroud, but could not reproduce it.

Your opinion is not proof, boyo. It's not even real Science.

---

It's obvious you didn't watch the video and don't know the subject matter/content. Just one guy. Know what you're talking about before you comment.

---

I know quite a bit about the matter. One biased video hardly moves the needle.

---

Then you know the Shroud has all the markings of a fraudulent relic.

---

Not really. And no one has made one, to show how it was done.

---

The Church has limited its examination. What has been allowed has been enough to call into question its authenticity as a burial shroud dating in early first century. The Church holds it out as a tease. If it were a testament to an all powerful supernatural god, whose objective is to convince the world to believe, then that god wouldn't hide it in mystery. That god would make sure its authenticity is unquestioned, and make it abundantly clear to the world.

---

its almost like you never read the bible..

Where does it say Gods objective is to convince everyone to believe?

---

The so called "Great Commission."

---

Matthew 28:19 is part of the Great Commission, where Jesus instructs His disciples to "go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

Doesnt say go make all people disciples, just disciples of all nations..

What else you got?

---

I have a better understanding of the English lanuage than you apparently. Nations are figments of people's collective imaginations, comprised of people.

---

yawn.. you know it wasnt written in english right?

28:19

From Jewish Bible- Therefore, go and make people from all nations into talmidim, immersing them into the reality of the Father, the Son and the Ruach HaKodesh,

King James 1611 - Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Latin - euntes ergo docete omnes gentes baptizantes eos in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti(says teach all nations)

Go to the people of all nations and make them my disciples. Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,

Maybe the EASY translation will help you out-
So you must go to people in every country of the world. Teach them how to become my disciples. Baptize them by the authority of God the Father, his Son and the Holy Spirit.

EHV- Therefore go and gather disciples from all nations by baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

ISV- Therefore, as you go, disciple people in all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit,

As I said, it says go teach the world, not everyone will be a disciple.. parable of the sower was core teaching. Jesus clearly knew not all would come to Father.

---

You're contradicting yourself now. How do you propose converting a nation other than one by one? By state theocratic edict - like when Christianity was proclaimed the state religion and became an instituon of the Roman government?

---

i didnt propose converting a nation.. you purposed that

I purposed teaching people from all over the world with the understanding not all would come to the Lord. Because thats what it says in the Bible..

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

anSo how was it made, TS?

---

Watch the video.

---

No one has been able to recreate the Shroud.

You still have the burden for your claim.

Science, after all.

---

Uh, I think you need to watch the video before you say that.

---

Take your own advice.

That video is just a couple guys who dismiss the Shroud, but could not reproduce it.

Your opinion is not proof, boyo. It's not even real Science.

---

It's obvious you didn't watch the video and don't know the subject matter/content. Just one guy. Know what you're talking about before you comment.

---

I know quite a bit about the matter. One biased video hardly moves the needle.

---

Then you know the Shroud has all the markings of a fraudulent relic.

---

Not really. And no one has made one, to show how it was done.

---

The Church has limited its examination. What has been allowed has been enough to call into question its authenticity as a burial shroud dating in early first century. The Church holds it out as a tease. If it were a testament to an all powerful supernatural god, whose objective is to convince the world to believe, then that god wouldn't hide it in mystery. That god would make sure its authenticity is unquestioned, and make it abundantly clear to the world.

---

First, I cannot help but notice you completely ignored my posts which focused specifically on the scientific debate. You have always crowed how Science admits when it is wrong and makes corrections; well sir there are quite a few scientists who dispute the testing methodology and the actual age of the Shroud, with real evidence for it's 1st Century creation out there. If you want to be a real scientist, you should

I also note that you continue to ignore the fact that no one has been able to recreate the thing. You toss out claims that it's a fraud, yet if that is so it's a very strange fraud, one no one has been able to duplicate, and among other things even the medieval date you prefer predates the invention of photography and 3-dimensional imaging by several centuries. Make one or show someone who made one using the technology of the 14th century and you have something, but for now your argument is specious by definition.

Finally, you might consider that I raised questions you could have used with validity, but I won't bring them up here because I really do think you should consider the long post with links that more than answers your continued unsupported claims.

---

I gave you a thorough analyis and examintation of the claims about the shroud, addressing the the science, and a refutation of your claims, point by point, that you obviously have ingnored.

If the claims about the shroud were true, the god of Christianity would want to proclaim "truth" to the world. And, certainly, if it were true, the Church would have it thoroughly examined, and proclaimed in support of the '"truth" and the "Church."

If the Church believed it to be real, to which it will not stipulate, it wouldn't hide behind keeping it secret. Perhaps they found it in the Talpiot Tomb?

---

If you really want an honest talk, address my post with all the links.

Right now you are 2 notches below Jerry Springer.

---

The post link I gave you addresses them in detail.

---

Nope.

I gave a detailed explanation in my own words with supporting links.

You either won't or cannot do as much, it appears.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Dishonest enough to deny what you actually posted ?

That's disappointing.

---

Huh?

---

You left this little pot shot at Protestants:

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/159792/replies/4549364

"Guess and youve got a 1 in 45,000 chance of being right. They have lots of religions to choose from."

(bold emphasis added to show the larger offense, not that there are 45,000 different denominations in truth)

Hiding from it now is beneath you.

---

I didnt hide from it. How does one choose with no magisterium and they all think they are right?

I was reading this over and thinking to myself that I’d love to know exactly how Protestants can explain all this without falling back on the juvenile “it’s just a demon” argument?

Demons don’t convert cannibalistic, child sacrificing barbarians to Christ. pic.twitter.com/jsJBWtRIar

— Bree Solstad (@BreeSolstad) May 23, 2026

Fre3dombear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Look at what he wrote. Said Protestants had a lot of "religions" to choose from.

And that's a lie.

---

he orignally said 45000 "versions" post schism to choose from

Maybe he said religions later

---

Check his 4:35 post.

---

Is that the hill youre on? Ok so you agree the 45,000 versions of non-Catholic Christianity to choose from. Got it.

---

^^^. Taps post

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So how was it made, TS?

---

Watch the video.

---

No one has been able to recreate the Shroud.

You still have the burden for your claim.

Science, after all.

---

Uh, I think you need to watch the video before you say that.

---

Take your own advice.

That video is just a couple guys who dismiss the Shroud, but could not reproduce it.

Your opinion is not proof, boyo. It's not even real Science.

---

It's obvious you didn't watch the video and don't know the subject matter/content. Just one guy. Know what you're talking about before you comment.

---

I know quite a bit about the matter. One biased video hardly moves the needle.

---

Then you know the Shroud has all the markings of a fraudulent relic.

---

Not really. And no one has made one, to show how it was done.

---

The Church has limited its examination. What has been allowed has been enough to call into question its authenticity as a burial shroud dating in early first century. The Church holds it out as a tease. If it were a testament to an all powerful supernatural god, whose objective is to convince the world to believe, then that god wouldn't hide it in mystery. That god would make sure its authenticity is unquestioned, and make it abundantly clear to the world.

---

First, I cannot help but notice you completely ignored my posts which focused specifically on the scientific debate. You have always crowed how Science admits when it is wrong and makes corrections; well sir there are quite a few scientists who dispute the testing methodology and the actual age of the Shroud, with real evidence for it's 1st Century creation out there. If you want to be a real scientist, you should

I also note that you continue to ignore the fact that no one has been able to recreate the thing. You toss out claims that it's a fraud, yet if that is so it's a very strange fraud, one no one has been able to duplicate, and among other things even the medieval date you prefer predates the invention of photography and 3-dimensional imaging by several centuries. Make one or show someone who made one using the technology of the 14th century and you have something, but for now your argument is specious by definition.

Finally, you might consider that I raised questions you could have used with validity, but I won't bring them up here because I really do think you should consider the long post with links that more than answers your continued unsupported claims.

---

I gave you a thorough analyis and examintation of the claims about the shroud, addressing the the science, and a refutation of your claims, point by point, that you obviously have ingnored.

If the claims about the shroud were true, the god of Christianity would want to proclaim "truth" to the world. And, certainly, if it were true, the Church would have it thoroughly examined, and proclaimed in support of the '"truth" and the "Church."

If the Church believed it to be real, to which it will not stipulate, it wouldn't hide behind keeping it secret. Perhaps they found it in the Talpiot Tomb?

---

It's secret? We know exactly where it is. It's been on display countless times. Why havent all the non believers ever been able to Replicate it to disprove the facts science has conveyed to us about its authenticity?

Our evidence exists. Yours, does not.

If you can produce a replica etc i will consider your position to have validity. Until then….believe and have faith and be saved.

Fre3dombear said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Look at what he wrote. Said Protestants had a lot of "religions" to choose from.

And that's a lie.

---

he orignally said 45000 "versions" post schism to choose from

Maybe he said religions later

---

Check his 4:35 post.

---

Is that the hill youre on? Ok so you agree the 45,000 versions of non-Catholic Christianity to choose from. Got it.

---

^^^. Taps post

---

In the post I quoted, you said "religions", not "non-Catholic Christianity".

You still playing Daffy?

Oldbear83 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Look at what he wrote. Said Protestants had a lot of "religions" to choose from.

And that's a lie.

---

he orignally said 45000 "versions" post schism to choose from

Maybe he said religions later

---

Check his 4:35 post.

---

Is that the hill youre on? Ok so you agree the 45,000 versions of non-Catholic Christianity to choose from. Got it.

---

^^^. Taps post

---

In the post I quoted, you said "religions", not "non-Catholic Christianity".

You still playing Daffy?

---

So How do you decided which of the 45,000 non-Catholic versions you choose from?

The shroud is fake, I thought everyone knew that!

Tempus Edax Rerum said:

---

The shroud is fake, I thought everyone knew that!

---

Luke 23:53
Taking the body of Jesus down, he wrapped it in a linen cloth and laid it in a tomb carved out of the rock, in which no one had ever been buried.

All is revealed to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear

Fre3dombear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Look at what he wrote. Said Protestants had a lot of "religions" to choose from.

And that's a lie.

---

he orignally said 45000 "versions" post schism to choose from

Maybe he said religions later

---

Check his 4:35 post.

---

Is that the hill youre on? Ok so you agree the 45,000 versions of non-Catholic Christianity to choose from. Got it.

---

^^^. Taps post

---

In the post I quoted, you said "religions", not "non-Catholic Christianity".

You still playing Daffy?

---

So How do you decided which of the 45,000 non-Catholic versions you choose from?

---

Sorry but only a naive and ignorant person would believe there are really "45,000" Protestant denominations,

and only a naive and ignorant person would pretend that there is only one kind of Roman Catholic.

But to your question, I believe in and belong to the Christ of Scripture, and abide in the Holy Spirit by His Grace.

Now back to the question. You said Protestants believe in many religions, was that a mis-statement or are you claiming that Protestant Christians are not Christians in truth?

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So how was it made, TS?

---

Watch the video.

---

No one has been able to recreate the Shroud.

You still have the burden for your claim.

Science, after all.

---

Uh, I think you need to watch the video before you say that.

---

Take your own advice.

That video is just a couple guys who dismiss the Shroud, but could not reproduce it.

Your opinion is not proof, boyo. It's not even real Science.

---

It's obvious you didn't watch the video and don't know the subject matter/content. Just one guy. Know what you're talking about before you comment.

---

I know quite a bit about the matter. One biased video hardly moves the needle.

---

Then you know the Shroud has all the markings of a fraudulent relic.

---

Not really. And no one has made one, to show how it was done.

---

The Church has limited its examination. What has been allowed has been enough to call into question its authenticity as a burial shroud dating in early first century. The Church holds it out as a tease. If it were a testament to an all powerful supernatural god, whose objective is to convince the world to believe, then that god wouldn't hide it in mystery. That god would make sure its authenticity is unquestioned, and make it abundantly clear to the world.

---

its almost like you never read the bible..

Where does it say Gods objective is to convince everyone to believe?

---

The so called "Great Commission."

---

Matthew 28:19 is part of the Great Commission, where Jesus instructs His disciples to "go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

Doesnt say go make all people disciples, just disciples of all nations..

What else you got?

---

I have a better understanding of the English lanuage than you apparently. Nations are figments of people's collective imaginations, comprised of people.

---

yawn.. you know it wasnt written in english right?

28:19

From Jewish Bible- Therefore, go and make people from all nations into talmidim, immersing them into the reality of the Father, the Son and the Ruach HaKodesh,

King James 1611 - Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Latin - euntes ergo docete omnes gentes baptizantes eos in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti(says teach all nations)

Go to the people of all nations and make them my disciples. Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,

Maybe the EASY translation will help you out-
So you must go to people in every country of the world. Teach them how to become my disciples. Baptize them by the authority of God the Father, his Son and the Holy Spirit.

EHV- Therefore go and gather disciples from all nations by baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

ISV- Therefore, as you go, disciple people in all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit,

As I said, it says go teach the world, not everyone will be a disciple.. parable of the sower was core teaching. Jesus clearly knew not all would come to Father.

---

You're contradicting yourself now. How do you propose converting a nation other than one by one? By state theocratic edict - like when Christianity was proclaimed the state religion and became an instituon of the Roman government?

---

i didnt propose converting a nation.. you purposed that

I purposed teaching people from all over the world with the understanding not all would come to the Lord. Because thats what it says in the Bible..

---

Quote:

---

Doesnt say go make all people disciples, just disciples of all nations..

---

You're contradicting yourself now.

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

anSo how was it made, TS?

---

Watch the video.

---

No one has been able to recreate the Shroud.

You still have the burden for your claim.

Science, after all.

---

Uh, I think you need to watch the video before you say that.

---

Take your own advice.

That video is just a couple guys who dismiss the Shroud, but could not reproduce it.

Your opinion is not proof, boyo. It's not even real Science.

---

It's obvious you didn't watch the video and don't know the subject matter/content. Just one guy. Know what you're talking about before you comment.

---

I know quite a bit about the matter. One biased video hardly moves the needle.

---

Then you know the Shroud has all the markings of a fraudulent relic.

---

Not really. And no one has made one, to show how it was done.

---

The Church has limited its examination. What has been allowed has been enough to call into question its authenticity as a burial shroud dating in early first century. The Church holds it out as a tease. If it were a testament to an all powerful supernatural god, whose objective is to convince the world to believe, then that god wouldn't hide it in mystery. That god would make sure its authenticity is unquestioned, and make it abundantly clear to the world.

---

First, I cannot help but notice you completely ignored my posts which focused specifically on the scientific debate. You have always crowed how Science admits when it is wrong and makes corrections; well sir there are quite a few scientists who dispute the testing methodology and the actual age of the Shroud, with real evidence for it's 1st Century creation out there. If you want to be a real scientist, you should

I also note that you continue to ignore the fact that no one has been able to recreate the thing. You toss out claims that it's a fraud, yet if that is so it's a very strange fraud, one no one has been able to duplicate, and among other things even the medieval date you prefer predates the invention of photography and 3-dimensional imaging by several centuries. Make one or show someone who made one using the technology of the 14th century and you have something, but for now your argument is specious by definition.

Finally, you might consider that I raised questions you could have used with validity, but I won't bring them up here because I really do think you should consider the long post with links that more than answers your continued unsupported claims.

---

I gave you a thorough analyis and examintation of the claims about the shroud, addressing the the science, and a refutation of your claims, point by point, that you obviously have ingnored.

If the claims about the shroud were true, the god of Christianity would want to proclaim "truth" to the world. And, certainly, if it were true, the Church would have it thoroughly examined, and proclaimed in support of the '"truth" and the "Church."

If the Church believed it to be real, to which it will not stipulate, it wouldn't hide behind keeping it secret. Perhaps they found it in the Talpiot Tomb?

---

If you really want an honest talk, address my post with all the links.

Right now you are 2 notches below Jerry Springer.

---

The post link I gave you addresses them in detail.

---

Nope.

I gave a detailed explanation in my own words with supporting links.

You either won't or cannot do as much, it appears.

---

I don't need summarize something that should be easy for you to follow.

Fre3dombear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So how was it made, TS?

---

Watch the video.

---

No one has been able to recreate the Shroud.

You still have the burden for your claim.

Science, after all.

---

Uh, I think you need to watch the video before you say that.

---

Take your own advice.

That video is just a couple guys who dismiss the Shroud, but could not reproduce it.

Your opinion is not proof, boyo. It's not even real Science.

---

It's obvious you didn't watch the video and don't know the subject matter/content. Just one guy. Know what you're talking about before you comment.

---

I know quite a bit about the matter. One biased video hardly moves the needle.

---

Then you know the Shroud has all the markings of a fraudulent relic.

---

Not really. And no one has made one, to show how it was done.

---

The Church has limited its examination. What has been allowed has been enough to call into question its authenticity as a burial shroud dating in early first century. The Church holds it out as a tease. If it were a testament to an all powerful supernatural god, whose objective is to convince the world to believe, then that god wouldn't hide it in mystery. That god would make sure its authenticity is unquestioned, and make it abundantly clear to the world.

---

First, I cannot help but notice you completely ignored my posts which focused specifically on the scientific debate. You have always crowed how Science admits when it is wrong and makes corrections; well sir there are quite a few scientists who dispute the testing methodology and the actual age of the Shroud, with real evidence for it's 1st Century creation out there. If you want to be a real scientist, you should

I also note that you continue to ignore the fact that no one has been able to recreate the thing. You toss out claims that it's a fraud, yet if that is so it's a very strange fraud, one no one has been able to duplicate, and among other things even the medieval date you prefer predates the invention of photography and 3-dimensional imaging by several centuries. Make one or show someone who made one using the technology of the 14th century and you have something, but for now your argument is specious by definition.

Finally, you might consider that I raised questions you could have used with validity, but I won't bring them up here because I really do think you should consider the long post with links that more than answers your continued unsupported claims.

---

I gave you a thorough analyis and examintation of the claims about the shroud, addressing the the science, and a refutation of your claims, point by point, that you obviously have ingnored.

If the claims about the shroud were true, the god of Christianity would want to proclaim "truth" to the world. And, certainly, if it were true, the Church would have it thoroughly examined, and proclaimed in support of the '"truth" and the "Church."

If the Church believed it to be real, to which it will not stipulate, it wouldn't hide behind keeping it secret. Perhaps they found it in the Talpiot Tomb?

---

It's secret? We know exactly where it is. It's been on display countless times. Why havent all the non believers ever been able to Replicate it to disprove the facts science has conveyed to us about its authenticity?

Our evidence exists. Yours, does not.

If you can produce a replica etc i will consider your position to have validity. Until then….believe and have faith and be saved.

---

Make it available for thorough scientific examination, then replication can be addressed if needed. Otherwise, it is just another relic collected like so many others when it was trendy for the Church to trade in "relics."

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

anSo how was it made, TS?

---

Watch the video.

---

No one has been able to recreate the Shroud.

You still have the burden for your claim.

Science, after all.

---

Uh, I think you need to watch the video before you say that.

---

Take your own advice.

That video is just a couple guys who dismiss the Shroud, but could not reproduce it.

Your opinion is not proof, boyo. It's not even real Science.

---

It's obvious you didn't watch the video and don't know the subject matter/content. Just one guy. Know what you're talking about before you comment.

---

I know quite a bit about the matter. One biased video hardly moves the needle.

---

Then you know the Shroud has all the markings of a fraudulent relic.

---

Not really. And no one has made one, to show how it was done.

---

The Church has limited its examination. What has been allowed has been enough to call into question its authenticity as a burial shroud dating in early first century. The Church holds it out as a tease. If it were a testament to an all powerful supernatural god, whose objective is to convince the world to believe, then that god wouldn't hide it in mystery. That god would make sure its authenticity is unquestioned, and make it abundantly clear to the world.

---

First, I cannot help but notice you completely ignored my posts which focused specifically on the scientific debate. You have always crowed how Science admits when it is wrong and makes corrections; well sir there are quite a few scientists who dispute the testing methodology and the actual age of the Shroud, with real evidence for it's 1st Century creation out there. If you want to be a real scientist, you should

I also note that you continue to ignore the fact that no one has been able to recreate the thing. You toss out claims that it's a fraud, yet if that is so it's a very strange fraud, one no one has been able to duplicate, and among other things even the medieval date you prefer predates the invention of photography and 3-dimensional imaging by several centuries. Make one or show someone who made one using the technology of the 14th century and you have something, but for now your argument is specious by definition.

Finally, you might consider that I raised questions you could have used with validity, but I won't bring them up here because I really do think you should consider the long post with links that more than answers your continued unsupported claims.

---

I gave you a thorough analyis and examintation of the claims about the shroud, addressing the the science, and a refutation of your claims, point by point, that you obviously have ingnored.

If the claims about the shroud were true, the god of Christianity would want to proclaim "truth" to the world. And, certainly, if it were true, the Church would have it thoroughly examined, and proclaimed in support of the '"truth" and the "Church."

If the Church believed it to be real, to which it will not stipulate, it wouldn't hide behind keeping it secret. Perhaps they found it in the Talpiot Tomb?

---

If you really want an honest talk, address my post with all the links.

Right now you are 2 notches below Jerry Springer.

---

The post link I gave you addresses them in detail.

---

Nope.

I gave a detailed explanation in my own words with supporting links.

You either won't or cannot do as much, it appears.

---

I doncan't provide evidence for my claims need summarize something that but still expect should be easy for you to accept them anyway follow.

---

Corrected.

REAL scientists follow the evidence.

4th and Inches said:

---

Tempus Edax Rerum said:

---

The shroud is fake, I thought everyone knew that!

---

Luke 23:53
Taking the body of Jesus down, he wrapped it in a linen cloth and laid it in a tomb carved out of the rock, in which no one had ever been buried.

All is revealed to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear

---

Is that supposed to convince me the shroud is real? Didn't work. Simple common sense does work, however.

TexasScientist said:

---

Make it available for thorough scientific examination, then replication can be addressed if needed. Otherwise, it is just another relic collected like so many others when it was trendy for the Church to trade in "relics."

---

Were the 30 scientists from around the world that studied the Shroud for 120 consecutive hours in 1978 not enough for you?

What more tests would you like?

Having said that, many Shroud enthusiasts would like more testing. When the time and technology is right, the Pope will allow it again.

Why did those men and women state in their finding that they still don't know how it was made, but it was indeed the burial cloth of a crucified man?

Why did many atheistic and agnostic scientists convert to Christianity after studying the Shroud?

Coke Bear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Make it available for thorough scientific examination, then replication can be addressed if needed. Otherwise, it is just another relic collected like so many others when it was trendy for the Church to trade in "relics."

---

Were the 30 scientists from around the world that studied the Shroud for 120 consecutive hours in 1978 not enough for you?

What more tests would you like?

Having said that, many Shroud enthusiasts would like more testing. When the time and technology is right, the Pope will allow it again.

Why did those men and women state in their finding that they still don't know how it was made, but it was indeed the burial cloth of a crucified man?

Why did many atheistic and agnostic scientists convert to Christianity after studying the Shroud?

---

TS doesn't like that set of results. He wants more tests until he gets the results he wants.

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So how was it made, TS?

---

Watch the video.

---

No one has been able to recreate the Shroud.

You still have the burden for your claim.

Science, after all.

---

Uh, I think you need to watch the video before you say that.

---

Take your own advice.

That video is just a couple guys who dismiss the Shroud, but could not reproduce it.

Your opinion is not proof, boyo. It's not even real Science.

---

It's obvious you didn't watch the video and don't know the subject matter/content. Just one guy. Know what you're talking about before you comment.

---

I know quite a bit about the matter. One biased video hardly moves the needle.

---

Then you know the Shroud has all the markings of a fraudulent relic.

---

Not really. And no one has made one, to show how it was done.

---

The Church has limited its examination. What has been allowed has been enough to call into question its authenticity as a burial shroud dating in early first century. The Church holds it out as a tease. If it were a testament to an all powerful supernatural god, whose objective is to convince the world to believe, then that god wouldn't hide it in mystery. That god would make sure its authenticity is unquestioned, and make it abundantly clear to the world.

---

its almost like you never read the bible..

Where does it say Gods objective is to convince everyone to believe?

---

The so called "Great Commission."

---

Matthew 28:19 is part of the Great Commission, where Jesus instructs His disciples to "go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

Doesnt say go make all people disciples, just disciples of all nations..

What else you got?

---

I have a better understanding of the English lanuage than you apparently. Nations are figments of people's collective imaginations, comprised of people.

---

yawn.. you know it wasnt written in english right?

28:19

From Jewish Bible- Therefore, go and make people from all nations into talmidim, immersing them into the reality of the Father, the Son and the Ruach HaKodesh,

King James 1611 - Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Latin - euntes ergo docete omnes gentes baptizantes eos in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti(says teach all nations)

Go to the people of all nations and make them my disciples. Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,

Maybe the EASY translation will help you out-
So you must go to people in every country of the world. Teach them how to become my disciples. Baptize them by the authority of God the Father, his Son and the Holy Spirit.

EHV- Therefore go and gather disciples from all nations by baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

ISV- Therefore, as you go, disciple people in all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit,

As I said, it says go teach the world, not everyone will be a disciple.. parable of the sower was core teaching. Jesus clearly knew not all would come to Father.

---

You're contradicting yourself now. How do you propose converting a nation other than one by one? By state theocratic edict - like when Christianity was proclaimed the state religion and became an instituon of the Roman government?

---

i didnt propose converting a nation.. you purposed that

I purposed teaching people from all over the world with the understanding not all would come to the Lord. Because thats what it says in the Bible..

---

Quote:

---

Doesnt say go make all people disciples, just disciples of all nations..

---

You're contradicting yourself now.

---

except i am not.. how do you not understand that 2819 means go out and teach. Followers will be made in every region and in every civilization through this teaching.

It doesnt say convert everyone everywhere, its not even possible. The core teaching of the parable of the sower applies and tells you that not all will be converted.

Those who can, See what happens when you dont have eyes to see? You get nonsensical replies like the one i am responding to

Again, you are confused. Not me. Its not your fault though, not all are called to the Lord and can see and hear the Word.

Tempus Edax Rerum said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Tempus Edax Rerum said:

---

The shroud is fake, I thought everyone knew that!

---

Luke 23:53
Taking the body of Jesus down, he wrapped it in a linen cloth and laid it in a tomb carved out of the rock, in which no one had ever been buried.

All is revealed to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear

---

Is that supposed to convince me the shroud is real? Didn't work. Simple common sense does work, however.

---

common sense tells you that?..

You barely know a small part of what the most knowledgable men to ever live knew. But sure, your common sense is spot on.

All people are called. Jesus did not preach a Gospel of despair.

"He calls upon all men, everywhere, to repent, because he has fixed a day when he will pronounce just judgement on the whole world." Acts 17:30-31

"The Lord is not being dilatory over his promise, as some think; he is only giving you more time, because his will is that all of you should attain repentance, not that some should be lost." 2 Peter 3:9

Sam Lowry said:

---

All people are called. Jesus did not preach a Gospel of despair.

"He calls upon all men, everywhere, to repent, because he has fixed a day when he will pronounce just judgement on the whole world." Acts 17:30-31

"The Lord is not being dilatory over his promise, as some think; he is only giving you more time, because his will is that all of you should attain repentance, not that some should be lost." 2 Peter 3:9

---

In no sense does 2 Peter 3:9 contradict the idea that God elects certain people to salvation. First, in context, election is not at all what the verse is talking about. Second, to interpret "not willing that any should perish" as "does not allow any to perish" results in the false doctrine of universalism. But God can "not desire" anyone to perish and still only elect some to salvation. There is nothing incongruous about that. God did not desire for sin to enter the world through the fall of Adam and Eve, yet He allowed it. God did not desire His only begotten Son to be betrayed, brutally tortured, and murdered, yet He allowed it.

In the same way, God does not desire anyone to perish. He desires all to come to repentance. At the same time, God recognizes that not everyone will come to repentance. It is undeniable that many will perish (Matthew 7:1314). Rather than being a contradiction to 2 Peter 3:9, God's electing and drawing of some to salvation is evidence that He truly does not desire people to perish. Were it not for election and the effectual calling of God, everyone would perish (John 6:44; Romans 8:2930).