Jesus is a Social Construct? Tell me more

[Atb210201]

What is not a social construct if we gonna live by that logic?

[Ramu]

@Atb210201 the Universe could care less about human logic

[Salvijus]

54 minutes ago, Nemra said:

He's coping so hard.

?

I didn't see any cope. The new evidence that Shroud of Turin dates to 2000years ago is legit tho. 

[Salvijus]

Lol I've just read a funny reply on a comment from somebody who claims the Shroud was forged. 

Simplest debunk which ignores all the other problems with it being a forgery.

1. the forger first somehow painted the bloodstains before he painted the image.

2. ⁠the forger integrated forensic qualities that would only be known in the 19th century.

3. ⁠the forger duplicated blood flow patterns in perfect forensic agreement to blood flow from the wrists at 65 degrees from vertical to suggest the exact positions of the arms in crucifixion. ⁠

4. the forger painted the blood flows with genuine AB- blood that he had spiked with excessive amounts of bilirubin since the forger knew that severe scourging with a Roman flagrum would cause erythrocyte hemolysis and jaundice.

5. ⁠the forger plotted the scourge marks on the body of the man on the shroud shroud to be consistent with forensic examination with two scourgers of the same height.

⁠6. the forger also duplicated abrasion and compression marks on the scourge wounds of the shoulders to suggest to 20th century examiners that the man on the shroud had carried a heavy weight following the scourging and more.

7. ⁠the forger, as the genius he is, illustrated the nails of a crucifixion accurately through the wrists instead of the palms as in all other conventional medieval representations.

⁠8. the forger salted the linen with pollen of plants indigenous only to the environment of Jerusalem in anticipation of 20th century palynological analysis.

9. ⁠the forger somehow managed to paint an anatomical and photographic perfect human image in a photographic negative manner centuries before photography.

10.⁠ the forger painted the image with some unknown medium using an unknown technique, 30-40ft away in order to discern the shadowy image as he continued. ⁠

11. the forger was clever enough to depict an adult with an unplaited ponytail, sidelocks and a beard consistent with a Jewish male of the 1st century. ⁠

12. the forger thought of such minute details incorporating dirt from the feet of the man on the shroud consistent with the limestone of the environment in Jerusalem. ⁠

13. the forger was such an expert in 20th century biochemistry, medicine, forensics, pathology, anatomy, botany, photography and 3D computer analysis, that he has foiled the attempts of modern science. His artistic technique clearly triumphs over the likes of Da Vinci and Michelangelo.

Edited October 7 by Salvijus

[Ramu]

@Salvijus No!  You're imagining the stupid shroud thing.  Pure horseshit!

[Nemra]

1 hour ago, Salvijus said:

I didn't see any cope. The new evidence that Shroud of Turin dates to 2000years ago is legit tho. 

The evidence is not enough to conclude that Jesus was wrapped by it.

It's likely that the person Jesus existed, but Christians care about evidence as long as it strengthens their Christianity.

They already believe that Jesus exists, because there can't be Christianity without him, and will just use that shroud thing as "proof" against the "skeptics".

Edited October 7 by Nemra

[CARDOZZO]

2 hours ago, Atb210201 said:

What is not a social construct if we gonna live by that logic?

Agreed.

There are levels of social constructs.

Jesus (Christianity) are on top of that hierarchy.

[Salvijus]

28 minutes ago, Nemra said:

The evidence is not enough to conclude that Jesus was wrapped by it.

I guess that's true. But I like the plausiblity of it. I feel the deeper one goes into investigating this Shroud, the more convincing it gets. 

28 minutes ago, Nemra said:

It's likely that the person Jesus existed, but Christians care about evidence as long as it strengthens their Christianity.

Christians already believe that Jesus existed. So, they will use this as "proof" against the "skeptics".

Yea I know what you mean. People are biased. Including skeptics. They too will select information that support their preferred mental positions. Still I find the Shroud an interesting and plausible little miracle dangling in front of our eyes. I like that. Just the fact that there is so much mistery that can't be explained is fascinating. 

Edited October 7 by Salvijus

[Nemra]

1 minute ago, Salvijus said:

People are biased. Including skeptics. They too will select information that support their preferred mental positions.

Christians are hella biased. 😏

[Salvijus]

Just now, Nemra said:

Christians are hella biased. 😏

It's okay. The level of bias in Christians is irrelevant to how convincing and fascinating the Shroud is imo. 

[Salvijus]

52 minutes ago, Ramu said:

@Salvijus No!  You're imagining the stupid shroud thing.  Pure horseshit!

 I like my imaginings. I would like to imagine a calmer version of you aswell

 

[Nemra]

5 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

It's okay. The level of bias in Christians is irrelevant to how convincing and fascinating the Shroud is imo. 

It's interesting, although not convincing for me.

Even if it's proved to be true, it'll only make him a person that actually existed, but not the way that Christians believe of him to be.

Also, bias could be relevant here if those scientists are Christians.

[PurpleTree]

You are a social construct too. 

[Nemra]

Knowing whether something is socially constructed depends on the technology used.

If someone traveled back in time with a camera and brought a picture of Jesus, then Jesus would mostly likely exist.

Edited October 7 by Nemra

[Salvijus]

23 minutes ago, Nemra said:

Also, bias could be relevant here if those scientists are Christians.

Mm, it depends on the level of spiritual development of the one making the research. Skeptics are just as biased in their research and the conclusions that they make. A pure heart is what is needed to see things more clearly. 

Edited October 7 by Salvijus

[Salvijus]

8 minutes ago, Nemra said:

 

If someone traveled back in time with a camera and brought a picture of Jesus, then Jesus would mostly likely exist.

They say Shroud of Turin is the first picture made by God 😂 

Because it's some kind of flash of light that got imprinted in the cloth. Like a photography. (I can't remember exactly) 

[Nemra]

25 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

A pure heart is what is needed to see things more clearly. 

I have yet to see a pure-hearted Christian.

When I say Christian, I don't mean SD Tier 2 person; I don't know if a person can be religious at that level. Maybe "green", but definitely someone who is mostly "blue".

I think skeptics couldn't be at lower stages below than "orange".

Also, being skeptical is important for being less biased.

Edited October 7 by Nemra

[Nemra]

10 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

They say Shroud of Turin is the first picture made by God. 😂

Maybe you should question their spirituality. 😁

14 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

Because it's some kind of flash of light that got imprinted in the cloth. Like a photography.

Maybe someone already traveled back in time. 👀

[Salvijus]

I'm happy with the conclusion here somehow. 

Peace🌻🦋💫

 

[Salvijus]

Oh, I still have something to say, lol. 

That sceptism can come from ego or from honesty. Lots of sceptism can be done just to avoid facing the truth aswell. Inventing new and new reasons to deny something that threatens the ego's thought structure. 

Edited October 7 by Salvijus