RE: The Unique Connection

I'm so sorry to hear that, Am.

I can't begin to imagine the pain you have both suffered.

Somebody once said to me when I was having difficulties with my daughter's father, "The truth will out". It turned out to be true.

Lies cannot be hidden forever and she will recognise you when you meet. She will know her own face, so she will know yours. If she's very young, she might not understand, but she will know.

RE: If I had to describe myself

Hmmm...I like that.

RE: The Unique Connection

Yes, she will.

My daughter recognised my sister the first time she met her.

hug

RE: i wanna make a short movie..

You're welcome, Wonderfull.

RE: i wanna make a short movie..

RE: i wanna make a short movie..

I'll see if I can find it.

RE: 50 Grayish Shades

giggle

My daughter went to see 50 Shades at the cinema.

She said it was brilliant.

The whole audience laughed out loud all the way through it, it was so bad.

laugh

RE: "TIME HAS COME TODAY"

I like you, Nam. I always have.

Just sayin'.

RE: A song from anothe life a another world

Can you hear that...?

It's the cogs and wheels going round inside my head. giggle

RE: Ok what's this about then.

Btw, a photograph might be considered a piece of artwork, so they haven't closed the door to the possibility of the Turin Shroud being a relic.

RE: Ok what's this about then.

Calling it the Holy Shroud isn't the same as claiming it's the burial shroud of Christ, or the burial shroud of Jesus.

A statue of Jesus, or Mary, or angels may be called a holy statue, but they are not believed to be a holy relic.

If they called the shroud a holy relic, then they'd be claiming it was the actual burial cloth of a holy person.

By calling it the Holy Shroud, all they're doing (at least technically) is saying it's an object, an icon, or a piece of artwork depicting Jesus.

RE: Batman vs. Superman

Yes, near enough every 28 days for the last 35 years and I ain't dead yet.

Superhero, schmuperhero. talk to hand

laugh

RE: "BEWARE OF THE QUIET ONES"

I was thinking about leaving a comment to tease you, but I thought you'd probably misinterpret it as being mean. It saddens me not being able to joke around with you, Nam. blues

RE: Ok what's this about then.

lollks...? I do wonder at myself sometimes. rolling on the floor laughing

RE: Ok what's this about then.

I checked out the official website for the Turin Shroud. You can book online for free, but calling by phone depends upon your network charges.

It also describes the shroud and it all lollks, just like the pope's speech, very non-commital.



Something just popped into my head as I was looking at the site - what if the shroud was a decorated piece of cloth prepared in anticipation of using it as some high ranking person's burial cloth?

RE: Ok what's this about then.

Okay, if you don't want to stop people from seeing it, or making their own choices, but you do want to stop people from being sold a pup, what action might you take?

RE: Ok what's this about then.

If the town shouldn't comercially benefit from it's visitors, should that be the same for the Olympics, other sporting, or entertainment events, or conferences, or sight-seeing?

RE: Ok what's this about then.

A different view in what way, Simmo?

RE: Ok what's this about then.

As I understand it, there's no charge to see the Turin Shroud, just that the viewings are booked, presumably for health and safety reasons. There have been stampedes and deaths on other pilgrimages, as I understand it.

It would be interesting to know if there's a booking fee, mind. laugh

RE: Ok what's this about then.

What difference does it make to you what they think, or why they wish to see it?

RE: Ok what's this about then.

Spot on, Simmo. My eyes see 'if it' as just one word ending in 't'. blushing

The problem is, now I'm not sure why you said what you did. giggle

How is it related to the question Zee asked, or anything I've said?

RE: Spring Violet Jam...using wild violets

... laugh

RE: Ok what's this about then.

And Ken...I still can't find anything conclusive to say it's a painting.

So far, I'm just seeing stuff which says nobody really knows how it was created.

dunno

RE: Spring Violet Jam...using wild violets

What are you like, Dreamcatcher?

I'm not very well, I haven't been able to eat since Friday and there's you putting a whole load of rice dishes in front of me! sigh

laugh

RE: Ok what's this about then.

Thanks for the video Ken, but I was hoping for a bit more.

In the documentary I watched, they had the fella who invented carbon dating. It seems the fibres had a residue on them due to bacterial contamination. This wasn't known about at the time when it was tested and the cleaning processes used at the time were ineffective against it. I think that means they carbon dated the residue, not the shroud fibres.

He basically said work was being done to find a way of removing the residue and when that had been sorted, they'd offer to test the shroud fibres again...but he couldn't say if the offer would be accepted. laugh

RE: Spring Violet Jam...using wild violets

I have some of them in my garden, but not enough to make jam, unfortunately.

RE: Ok what's this about then.

I'm struggling to find an unbiased, or up to date documentary. Any links would be gratefully received.

It has occurred to me that this is an important subject to you, Zee. Why create a blog about it if it didn't have some kind of impact, or emotional investment for you?

I also wonder if total rejection, even to the point of denying that it's an interesting piece of art, or history strikes me as fanatical as those who start talking about black holes and resurrection phenomena in relation to the Turin Shroud.

RE: Ok what's this about then.

Looking at like that, the outline with the hands crossed reminds me of images of knights in shining armour. dunno

RE: Ok what's this about then.

@ Ken... Time for me to watch another documentary, then. laugh

RE: Ok what's this about then.

The Mona Lisa is a stain, just a very well arranged one. laugh

I've just watched an interesting documentary, albeit a probably biased one.

The blood marks are actually blood on the shroud. The blood group (AB) matches the blood on a cloth in Spain that is supposed to be the one which covered Jesus' head after he was taken down from the cross. DNA testing would be interesting, eh? I wonder why that hasn't been done.

28 species of pollen found on the cloth correspond with plants only found in the Middle East, suggesting at some point the cloth has been there.

The image is a negative, like the negative of a photograph. The image has not been painted on the cloth because, unlike the blood stains, nothing has soaked into the cloth.

The image corresponds to common imagery of Jesus for centuries and it has been suggested that the image on the Turin Shroud might be the prototype for all the subsequent imagery.

The image on the cloth appears to replicate internal skeletal structure in places, suggesting it could have been formed by radiation, like an X-ray image.

The fibres of the cloth have been coated with some kind of bacterial residue which may have affected the carbon dating, ie. the bacterial contamination is from 700 years ago, but the cloth might be much older.

Even if it was shown to be about 2,000 years old, it doesn't prove it's the image of Jesus. Even if it could be proved it's Jesus, it doesn't prove that Jesus was the son of a god, or that a god exists.

I do find it interesting that it's at least 700 years old and the image doesn't appear to have been painted on. Don't you find that interesting?

This is a list of blog comments created by jac_the_gripper.

We use cookies to ensure that you have the best experience possible on our website. Read Our Privacy Policy Here