'Sorry. No cigar. Per electron microscope examination the image is
pigment, A PAINTING!!!!!! It is NOT the shroud Jesus had and a simple
investigation into how they wrapped corpses in the first century would
also show that it is stupidity to say this is his shroud. He was not
simply covered like a sleeping bag, but wrapped much like an Egyptian
mummy, though not nearly so formally. He was in a cocoon-like wrapping.

Signature
Mike D.'
REPLY: I think you need to go to the actual home site for the Shroud
Mike and get up to speed. Its absolutely proven that there is
hemoglobin on all the wounds. That means blood . The Shroud could not
have been painted for many many other reasons as well. Further, there
were many forms of ancient burial preperation ; the Jews often used the
method found on the Shroud along with some 75 lbs of spices at times. Do
a google under : Dr. Gary Habermas who is the leading expert on
crucifiction and burial., and, youll see how The Jews prepared the
deceased loved ones bodies.
Lastly, please obtain the Booklet called The 12 Points which Prove
Christianity from www.impactapologetics.com . You will find incredible
solid evidence for the existence of God, Christ, absolute morals, The
Bible and the Afterlife ; if you have an open mind, you will end up a
Believer and follower the same that Dr. Simon Greenleaf did, who is the
worlds foremost Law Professor on Court Evidence. He put it all to the
test ... a test that few people ever undertake.
The Truth Squad - 09 Mar 2005 15:49 GMT
Yeah dave.....Go ahead and promote another of your pseudo-scientific
sites where self-proclaimed religious nuts put forth more fundy Bull
Crap....What you fail to grasp is that most people believe in science
and not some invisible fantasy
And why not tell us how the Earth is only 6000 YEARS old too you
uneducated fundy idiot
R & A - 10 Mar 2005 02:33 GMT
> 'Sorry. No cigar. Per electron microscope examination the image is
> pigment, A PAINTING!!!!!! It is NOT the shroud Jesus had and a simple
> investigation into how they wrapped corpses in the first century would
> also show that it is stupidity to say this is his shroud. He was not
> simply covered like a sleeping bag, but wrapped much like an Egyptian
> mummy, though not nearly so formally. He was in a cocoon-like wrapping.
Try this link: www.shroud.com
KissHanksAss - 10 Mar 2005 21:32 GMT
> 'Sorry. No cigar. Per electron microscope examination the image is
> pigment, A PAINTING!!!!!! It is NOT the shroud Jesus had and a simple
> investigation into how they wrapped corpses in the first century would
> also show that it is stupidity to say this is his shroud. He was not
> simply covered like a sleeping bag, but wrapped much like an Egyptian
> mummy, though not nearly so formally. He was in a cocoon-like wrapping.
Its absolutely proven that there is > hemoglobin on all the wounds. That
means blood .
Patronising POS!
The Shroud could not > have been painted for many many other reasons as
well.
Document them please and give us all a laugh!
Further, there > were many forms of ancient burial preperation ; the Jews
often used the > method found on the Shroud along with some 75 lbs of spices
at times.
How is that figure arrived at? What spices were they? Spices were, are
indeed a valuable commodity. Someone would have to be very rich to use that
amount.
Do > a google under : Dr. Gary Habermas who is the leading expert on >
crucifiction and burial.,
I did he isn't. There is little or no objectivity in his work!
Snip>
> Lastly, please obtain the Booklet called The 12 Points which Prove >
> Christianity from www.impactapologetics.com . You will find
More fundy bullshit!
you will end up a > Believer and follower the same that Dr. Simon Greenleaf
did, who is the > worlds foremost Law Professor on Court Evidence.
Why do you talk about a man who died in 1853 in the present tense. A typical
fundy trick to appear knowledgeable when you are backed into a corner.
Get an education ya moron!
The Truth Squad - 11 Mar 2005 15:14 GMT
You're SOOOO right there, dave is a f.cking moron.....
He's still spouting off "facts" like how Darwin and Huxley were
"associates" and that the Sun runs on Nitrogen fusion..
The Human Evolution should be SOOOO glad he forced an abortion on that
underaged broad he knocked up with his demon seed
Mike Dobony - 13 Mar 2005 22:59 GMT
> 'Sorry. No cigar. Per electron microscope examination the image is
> pigment, A PAINTING!!!!!! It is NOT the shroud Jesus had and a simple
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> crucifiction and burial., and, youll see how The Jews prepared the
> deceased loved ones bodies.
A king only had about 50 lbs of spices. Commoners only had a few pounds at
best. NONONE has EVER found any of the spices on the shroud. Also, the
image is contrary to the Biblical description. The shroud fails to show the
napkin (used to tie the mouth closed) nor the head wrapping. Also, why was
there PAINT in the image? You still failed to explain that. BTW, the
scientist who examined the PAINTING under the electron microscope was a
Christian! Why are you so insistant on using invented evidence to prove the
Bible is true? Just rely on the facts. There are PLENTY of actual facts to
prove the Bible correct. Your stupidity and lack of ethics only destroys
honest and true Christian's testimonies and efforts.
> Lastly, please obtain the Booklet called The 12 Points which Prove
> Christianity from www.impactapologetics.com . You will find incredible
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> worlds foremost Law Professor on Court Evidence. He put it all to the
> test ... a test that few people ever undertake.
The Truth Squad - 14 Mar 2005 00:19 GMT
Dave invents ALL KINDS OF "FACTS"
I won't waste my time repeating any of his many stupid proclamations,
except this one:
He proclaimed that Aldous Huxley and Charles Darwin were "associates"
when anyone with half a brain knows they weren't even alive at the same
time
Jenny6833A - 14 Mar 2005 01:11 GMT
> Dave invents ALL KINDS OF "FACTS"
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> when anyone with half a brain knows they weren't even alive at the same
> time
They were not alive at the same time. However, THOMAS HENRY Huxley
*was* a contemporary of Charles Darwin and was an indefatigable
champion of Darwin's point of view.
Mixing up those two famous Huxleys is certainly an error, but not quite
as grievous an error as you make it out to be.
Hey, there are plenty of *good* reasons for rejecting the shroud.
There's no need to emphasize bad ones.
:-)
Jenny
Jenny6833A - 14 Mar 2005 01:27 GMT
> Its absolutely proven that there is
> hemoglobin on all the wounds. That means blood .
Even if it's blood, so what? Is it chicken blood? Goat blood? Dog
blood? Human blood?
If you think it's human blood, how do you know?
Even if it could be proven to be human blood, so what? Whose blood?
It could well be the blood of the "artist" who "painted" the shroud?
You're not proving a thing.
:-|
Jenny