otseng wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 8:56 am
JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 3:49 am
Notice our claimant here demands
an explanation, declaring the absence of such makes their claim true (best) by default. This ain't how facts work.
This is how debates work: I have a position and you have a position; I defend my position and attack your position; you defend your position and attack my position.
Ackshually, site rules indicate the challenger is under no obligation to provide alternate explanations, or to defend claims they don't make.
I've never claimed Jesus was born of a virgin,...
There's nine times the Bible claims it just on the one quick google. As you promote this shroud, we're confronted by claims that bear on the matter. Whether you promote such is beside the point. We all know Christians have a wont to pick and choose which Bible claims they accept. My position is that as you refer to the Bible in order to match up scars, we're all to consider the Bible in it's entirety, as relates to reliability of claims.
...that we have a "contemporary" picture of Jesus, or we have a "contemporary" sample of his blood. So, your "attacks" are all spurious and irrelevant since I've never made these claims.
These are claims made regarding the individual in question, and so are worthy of consideration whether they make you proud or not.
What I am claiming is the shroud is the authentic burial shroud of Jesus and I brought up my final arguments many pages ago which you have consistently failed to address.
I have addressed my concerns with your position. That you reject my concerns speaks volumes about your faulty conclusions in this matter.
As for your claim, I don't even know what it is. Are you even willing to claim it is a medieval forgery, which pretty much all shroud skeptics do claim?
My claim is that we have no means to confirm this shroud as being anything other'n a piece of cloth with the apparent image of a human male somehow (placed?) upon it. (However placed, naturally or no)
I claim we can't confirm the provenance of the shroud, the y chromosome issue, the image, or the blood as belonging to the character in question. Someone who can English, please fix that sentence for me
In the absence of confirmation, the best we can do is judge this item, under this context, as unexplained.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.